> The legislation includes a clause that exempts a company "that owns and operates a theme park or entertainment complex".
Amazing.
Amazing.
Vague bills that are sure to be challenged in court are pretty standard partisan fare. They're essentially win-win.
If you pass it, and it's upheld, you get to trumpet your victory.
If you pass it, and it gets struck down by the courts, you get to rally your base with how the courts are thwarting your agenda.
Bonus points if it's on an ephemeral enough topic that it would be impossible for it to "fail" post-implementation.
While I lived there, it had strip clubs. A fair number of them. One of the reasons they shut down was a massive roadwork project on South Orange Blossom Trail where a lot of them were. Many, many businesses shuttered due to the road work median limiting left turns, and the widening reducing available parking to next to nothing.
Quite true. Yet, as you would expect, today's Orlando doesn't lack for restaurants, bars, gas stations, night clubs, etc. But one business category conspicuously failed to make a return.
More likely an in-person VR space.
On a slightly-related note: I do feel that the rules for platform moderation should be different between platforms that are geared towards children vs adults.
I wonder if the future holds an internet that's heavily segregated between the two groups? Maybe everyone will auto-graduate from kidFacebook to adultFacebook when they turn 18?
I really don't think that would have been necessary.
And the wording is on page 17: "The term does not include any information service, system, Internet search engine, or access software provider operated by a company that owns and operates a theme park or entertainment complex"