3 ms·
that being said, I think there is probably legal precedent in holding Youtube accountable to the public interest given its breadth and depth. Looking at the ty
by caycep 10y ago
that being said, I think there is probably legal precedent in holding Youtube accountable to the public interest given its breadth and depth. Looking at the typical 1st amendment litmus test re: falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater - even if that theater is private, what is yelled inside becomes public interest if it affects the public welfare.
- malnourish 10y agoIt's a popular myth that yelling "fire" in a theater is unlawful. For speech to be unlawful it must incite violence: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/ http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time... http://civil-liberties.yoexpert.com/civil-liberties-general/is-it-legal-to-shout-%22fire%22-in-a-crowded-theater-19421.html http://civil-liberties.yoexpert.com/civil-liberties-general/...
- lostlogin 10y agoBeing trampled to death is fairly violent. I wonder how non-intential violence would be viewed by a court.
- smogcutter 10y agoEven the incitement or "fighting words" doctrine is limited to specific face to face threats: https://popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-censorship-tropes-in-the-medias-coverage-of-free-speech-controversies/ https://popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-cens...