> So Apple isn’t allowed the freedom to do as they want?
Giving for-profit corporations "freedoms" like they were people was a mistake. Once an organization grows to a certain size, it has more in common with a government than a person. When that happens, their "freedoms" should be appropriately circumscribed.
> So who determines which companies have the rights to exclude others and which doesn't?
You misunderstand: I wasn't commenting on which companies have rights or not, but about which rights companies should have at all, and where their rights stand in relation to those held by individuals. Corporations are not natural persons, they're creatures animated by legislation and can be regulated by it or abolished entirely.
This has absolutely nothing to do with that though. You can't force a company or an individual to listen to your opinion on whether penguins are the greatest birds alive.
> You can't force a company or an individual to listen to your opinion on whether penguins are the greatest birds alive.
No, that's wrong. The government can force a company to provide services to someone, despite however much that company may disagree them, their views, or their identity. A lot of anti-discrimination law works that way. For instance: private individuals have the right not associate with a particular person for any reason, but companies do not.
The government shouldn’t though, equality of outcome is evil, forcing someone to keep Alex Jones is similar to forcing a company to hire 50/50 male/women staff.
If you violate a TOS you get banned. Alex Jones is a vile troll, he broke the rules and reaped the consequences. The government shouldn’t prevent this just because he has vile listeners.
Apple's wrong here.