A federal judge Wednesday put on hold a first-of-its-kind law in Florida that authorized the state to penalize social media companies when they ban political candidates, a win for social media companies as they try to keep control of their platforms. NBC has the report.

U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law, which was scheduled to go into effect Thursday.

Last month, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed into law, a legislation that will make it illegal for social media platforms and any of the big tech, to ban anyone in Florida.

Hinkle said the law’s ban on “deplatforming” likely violated the free speech rights of the tech companies, which under the First Amendment are generally free to decide what to publish without government interference.

“The legislation compels providers to host speech that violates their standards — speech they otherwise would not host — and forbids providers from speaking as they otherwise would,” he wrote.

Referring to the sweeping scope of the law, he added: “Like prior First Amendment restrictions, this is an instance of burning the house to roast a pig.”

The law says that a platform may not “permanently delete or ban” a candidate for office. Suspensions of up to 14 days are allowed under the law, and a service could still remove individual posts that violate its terms of service.

The state’s elections commission could fine a social media company $250,000 a day for statewide candidates and $25,000 a day for other candidates, if a company were found to have violated the law. Individuals could also sue.

Florida’s Republican-led legislature passed the law this year partly as a response to the social media bans against former President Donald Trump after the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Tech companies including Twitter, Facebook and YouTube said Trump broke their rules, including by promoting violence.

But the law is also the latest episode in a years-long fight between social media platforms and Republican politicians. Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, said in May when he signed the law that it was “protection against the Silicon Valley elites” for “real Floridians.”

Hinkle said that statements from DeSantis and others showed the law to be “viewpoint-based” discrimination.

“The legislation now at issue was an effort to rein in social-media providers deemed too large and too liberal,” he wrote. But, he added, “Balancing the exchange of ideas among private speakers is not a legitimate governmental interest. And even aside from the actual motivation for this legislation, it is plainly content-based and subject to strict scrutiny.”

The judge also questioned why the law discriminates against social media providers that are not under common ownership with a theme park. In a nod to Disney, companies were excluded from the law if they operate “a theme park or entertainment complex.”

Hinkle’s ruling came in a lawsuit filed by two tech industry trade groups, NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association. Their members include Twitter, Facebook and YouTube’s parent company, Alphabet, which also owns Google.

“We cannot stand idly by as Florida’s lawmakers push unconstitutional bills into law that bring us closer to state-run media and a state-run internet,” NetChoice Vice President Carl Szabo said when they filed the lawsuit in May.

Texas state lawmakers considered a similar bill during their session this year but did not pass it.

And in April, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, a conservative, wrote that lawmakers may have a firm basis for regulating the content moderation decisions of tech companies.

As Huawei struggles to keep its place in the global roll out of 5G network, immobilized by US sanctions. Telecom companies are weighing their options for potential partnership with the embattled Chinese telecom giant.

Reuters reported that Orange, France’s largest telecoms firm, will avoid using equipment from Chinese vendors when developing Europe’s 5G networks, opting for suppliers such as Ericsson and Nokia instead, according to its chief executive.

While many countries have come under the pressure of the United States, cutting ties with Huawei and being careful not to use its infrastructure in their 5G roll out, Orange sees no issue in working with Huawei in Africa, where the Chinese company dominates as a supplier of equipment to many telecoms operators.

“We’re working more and more with Chinese vendors in Africa, not because we like China, but we have an excellent business relationship with Huawei,” CEO Stephane Richard told Reuters at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona on Tuesday.

“They’ve invested in Africa while the European vendors have been hesitating.”

Africa has so far been free from US pressure and has become a fertile ground for Huawei. Beijing has recently developed cordial bilateral ties with many African nations, paving the way for Huawei to lead 5G roll out in the continent without hassles.

After all, African countries are not concerned about the national security threat that the US has warned that Huawei poses, although the company has repeatedly denied it has ties with the Chinese military that could pose a national security risk to countries where it operates overseas.

Some countries, such as Britain and Sweden, had banned the Chinese vendors outright, while others have encouraged telecom operators to opt for European suppliers, particularly in the core parts of their networks.

“It’s not only the pressure from the government – we are European citizens and share the concern,” Richard said in an interview on the sidelines of Mobile World Congress. “We can’t ignore the fact that the big Chinese players are close to the Chinese state.”

Ericsson and Nokia have steadily taken market share from Huawei and, late last year, Orange’s Belgian division decided to progressively replace Huawei equipment with kit from Nokia.

The Orange CEO also showed willingness to use gear from South Korea’s Samsung, which he described as an alternative to the “China vs. Europe debate”.

Samsung signed Vodafone as its first European customer earlier this month as it tries to enter a market dominated by Nokia, Ericsson and Huawei.

“We’ll need time and additional investment to build new standalone networks with multiple vendors,” Richard said. “The fact is that in Europe today developing 5G networks with Chinese vendors is more and more difficult – we take this as a reality.”

While Swedish Ericsson and Finish Nokia are cashing in on Huawei’s misfortune in Europe and North America, the Chinese vendor sees a lifeline in Africa and South America, where the Chinese government has considerable interests protected by its growing influence.

But most African countries are dragging feet in their 5G roll out, limiting the scope of Huawei’s potential market in the continent.

Lionel Messi’s contract with FC Barcelona expired in the midnight of June 30, making him a free agent and further hyping the speculations that have surrounded his future.

Since last year when the Argentine astro sent a burofax to the then club’s president, Josep Bartomeu and his board, saying he wants to leave Barcelona, one of the greatest tasks of Barca has been how to keep Messi at Camp Nou beyond June 30 2021. While the brouhaha that followed his decision to leave his childhood club has died down, Messi’s future remains unsettled and Barcelona doesn’t seem to have a grip on it yet.

A lot of changes have followed Messi’s decision to quit Barcelona. The Catalan side, in a bid to appease its greatest asset, has called for election, elected a new president following the resignation of Bartomeu, orchestrated by Messi throwing in the towel.

The new president, Joan Laporta has vowed to offer Messi a new contract he can’t resist, but there have been obstacles. Barcelona, like every other club in Europe has been dealt a financial blow by the pandemic, limiting its financial capability to retain Messi with a mouth-watering new contract. Messi’s agent and father, Jorge Messi has been communicating with Barcelona with the aim of getting the six-time Ballon D’or winner to sign a new contract, but the inability of the parties to reach an agreement before the expiration of Messi’s contract has further compounded the situation.

Messi becoming a free agent means that Barcelona will have to re-sign him, and he will have to register with La Liga as a new player with the club. That increases the chances of other clubs wooing him over. Also as a new signing, Messi, whose wages are far above average, will have to be fit into the framework of La Liga’s financial regulations by Barcelona.

The Spanish football authorities have been working to tame high financial spending by clubs jeopardizing fair play. Earlier, La Liga president Javier Tebas had warned Barca to reduce its wages or they won’t be able to register Messi ahead of the 2021-22 season.

In addition, Messi said last year in a tell-all interview with Goal, that he tried to leave Barcelona because there is no project, which has resulted in the club losing its form and many trophies, (Champions League and La Liga) among other competitions. Though Laporta promised that Barca will embark on projects that will see a new team built around Messi, the club’s financial status is posing a challenge to his ability to fulfill the promise and Messi needs assurance that there will be projects.

The 34 years old is currently with Albiceleste, Argentine’s national team in Brazil, where the 2020 Copa America is taking place whilst his future in Barcelona is being negotiated. There is optimism that Messi will commit his future to Barcelona by signing a new contract, but the complexities surrounding the new contract opens him up to other possibilities.