>For a platform like Twitch, this is fine. They have a brand.
As someone who does not operate a streaming platform, I don't care whether they have a brand or not - I care about the pragmatic benefits of living in a society where principles like innocent-until-proven-guilty are available and practiced in a way that benefits average people like me. I think the number of people who would consider "they have a brand" to be a good justification can't be higher than the number who own major brands.
Nobody is “innocent until proven guilty”. You are either, as a matter of fact, innocent or guilty. Our constitution prohibits the government from depriving you of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. But Twitch, or I, or you, can make up our own minds about your innocence or guilt, trial or no trial, and proceed according to our rights and inclinations. That right, the freedom of association, is as important as the right to be free of penalty from the government absent due process.
Due process was invented for a reason, and that reason is that innocent people like us do not like being unjustly punished. Any entity powerful enough to deliver an unjust punishment qualifies for the reason that due process was invented.
As someone who does not operate a streaming platform, I don't care whether they have a brand or not - I care about the pragmatic benefits of living in a society where principles like innocent-until-proven-guilty are available and practiced in a way that benefits average people like me. I think the number of people who would consider "they have a brand" to be a good justification can't be higher than the number who own major brands.