Be careful what you wish for. My guess is, the results of a flurry of suits would be what you're seeing on YouTube right now, demonetization of anything remotel

Be careful what you wish for. My guess is, the results of a flurry of suits would be what you're seeing on YouTube right now, demonetization of anything remotely controversial. You'll get squeaky clean ads from large dominant corporations, and the only content able to monetize them will be squeaky clean large content providers. Lost in the shuffle will be small content providers and small vendors who need to advertise. Then you'll be back on HN complaining about how Google is censoring everything and favoring big players, leading to greater concentration of media conglomeration, all the while ignoring that this is implicitly what you asked for by asking for costly regulation -- which doesn't hurt big firms as much as you think and primarily hurts smaller players. The internet's come along way from the freedom we imagined in the late 80s and 90s. In my college Cypherpunk days, I wrote one of the first anonymizing internet proxies to combat the Communications Decency Act (http://web.archive.org/web/20011122042440/http://www.clark.net:80/pub/rjc/decensedoc.html http://web.archive.org/web/20011122042440/http://www.clark.n...), because at the time, the internet was pretty much the only place in existence where the government did not have the ability to regulate people's behavior. Now we've arrived at a place where even so-called liberals, progressives, and civil libertarians, are calling for the government to censor indirectly, what can be published on the internet. And make no mistake, it is government censorship even if you are outsourcing that responsibility to private corporations via the civil courts, in much the same way that Extraordinary Rendition is still torture, even if the CIA outsources it to a third world dungeon. The FTC does not punish public radio and TV because shady diet scammers are selling snake oil. They don't shut down radio for Chiropractice (a pseudo-scientific medical scam), or for "financial advice" shows which sell people obviously bad investment advice on "market timing" when they'd be better off with an ETF. On any given day, I'd estimate about 50% of radio ads are scams on my way to work. How far do we take things to "protect" the public from scams and sex by censoring our media? How about harsh penalties for people operating the scams? Should you be allowed to Gmail because your spam filter let through an email scam and you got suckered by it?