3 ms·

Interestingly, this article is written from the perspective that Facebook is responsible for everything posted on its website.

by woah 8y ago

seanmcdirmid 8y ago
This is actually an interesting question, from a legal standpoint anyways. I don't think Myanmar has a safe harbor exemption like the US does, they actually have some pretty heavy handed censorship laws on the books. However, Facebook doesn't even have an office in Myanmar, they aren't officially there, and without a GFW Myanmar can't really block Facebook (nor would the people be ok with that, as Facebook has already become the internet to many). Probably why Facebook won't be opening an office in Myanmar anytime soon, at least until they can sort these issues out and have some strong legs to stand on.
- repsilat 8y ago
  Linking this explicitly to safe harbour like you've done is important -- the knee-jerk response online is often to condemn Facebook for not policing content but to defend content hosters for not being able to filter out all instances of copyright violations. Maybe those positions are held by different people, and maybe there's some good-faith "make an effort" middleground, and maybe the standards should be different because nobody dies when someone pirates Westworld, but they're clearly analogous. If we do have different standards we should be able to back it up with argument, and try hard not to let how much we like the companies colour our judgement.
  - Nasrudith 8y ago
    Not to mention that the impossible remains so even in if it is for a good cause.
  - Kalium 8y ago
    The middle ground is a great place to be if you want to take fire from everyone. In terms of legal and regulatory risk, it's an incredibly hazardous place to be because it has few defenders and many attackers. Personally, I'm uncomfortable with the idea of demanding that megacorporations do censorship for us on whatever arbitrary standards they can be convinced are good.

Interestingly, this article is written from the perspective that Facebook is responsible for everything posted on its website.

by woah 8y ago

Interestingly, this article is written from the perspective that Facebook is responsible for everything posted on its website.

seanmcdirmid 8y ago

This is actually an interesting question, from a legal standpoint anyways. I don't think Myanmar has a safe harbor exemption like the US does, they actually have some pretty heavy handed censorship laws on the books. However, Facebook doesn't even have an office in Myanmar, they aren't officially there, and without a GFW Myanmar can't really block Facebook (nor would the people be ok with that, as Facebook has already become the internet to many). Probably why Facebook won't be opening an office in Myanmar anytime soon, at least until they can sort these issues out and have some strong legs to stand on.

repsilat 8y ago
Linking this explicitly to safe harbour like you've done is important -- the knee-jerk response online is often to condemn Facebook for not policing content but to defend content hosters for not being able to filter out all instances of copyright violations. Maybe those positions are held by different people, and maybe there's some good-faith "make an effort" middleground, and maybe the standards should be different because nobody dies when someone pirates Westworld, but they're clearly analogous. If we do have different standards we should be able to back it up with argument, and try hard not to let how much we like the companies colour our judgement.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  Not to mention that the impossible remains so even in if it is for a good cause.
- Kalium 8y ago
  The middle ground is a great place to be if you want to take fire from everyone. In terms of legal and regulatory risk, it's an incredibly hazardous place to be because it has few defenders and many attackers. Personally, I'm uncomfortable with the idea of demanding that megacorporations do censorship for us on whatever arbitrary standards they can be convinced are good.