3 ms·
> I think the missing discussion is that some bad law exists, but that SESTA/FOSTA is not that bad law: Websites should not be immune to prosecution for intenti
by AFNobody 8y ago
> I think the missing discussion is that some bad law exists, but that SESTA/FOSTA is not that bad law: Websites should not be immune to prosecution for intentionally facilitating criminal activity. Section 230
Pretending that Section 230 willing enables participation in an illegal enterprise is a complete fabrication with no grounding in reality.
Prosecuting Backpage without SESTA/FOSTA was possible which is why Backpage was taken down and indicted BEFORE the law was signed (and therefore, enforceable).
Why do you think all the torrent sites get taken down? Or YouTube was sued? or 2903420934230 other things where a site violates some law be profiting from otherwise illegal UGC? Or the various dark net markets like the one Dread Pirate Roberts ran?
Section 230 has _never_ provided more than a reasonable barrier to overcome to prevent absurd legal attacks.