> Well, than Section 230 is simply wrong. Wrong as drafted, wrong as interpreted or wrong conceptually? Laws are what they are - there's really no right or wr

> Well, than Section 230 is simply wrong. Wrong as drafted, wrong as interpreted or wrong conceptually? Laws are what they are - there's really no right or wrong about them. > I fail to see how it can be damaging for a site to delete some unlawful-ruled content It's not damaging to remove it. It's damaging to be compelled to remove it. Handing the judiciary this tool to make such orders opens the door to all sorts of down-court mischief. If the goal is simply the effect in this one case, then order the poster to take it down and Section 230 stands unmolested. But that's not the goal, or it would be done that way already. The goal (for some parties) is handing the tool-to-compel to the judiciary.