>Tech companies, as private businesses, have the right to choose what speech exists on their sites, much as a newspaper can pick which letters to the editor to

>Tech companies, as private businesses, have the right to choose what speech exists on their sites, much as a newspaper can pick which letters to the editor to publish. This sentiment is a little odd. Tech companies like Facebook and Google are not at all like a newspaper. Someone can copy a copyrighted poem to their front page, and Facebook may spread the link around before being notified and removing the content. If the New York Times were to publish copyrighted material without the appropriate license, it would be obvious just how much they aren't like Facebook. And let's not even talk about the legal weirdness of being able to google The Pirate Bay. The compromise of the DMCA seems like it hinged on the fact that tech companies are not publishers or editors, and as such do not have the same moral and legal liabilities for things that appear on their platforms. In a sense, OSP's and ISP's are just "tubes". The demands being placed on tech companies seem to be increasingly reactive and contradictory. As bad as article 11 and 13 are, they seem to at least be consistent in that tech companies are now responsible for everything that appears on their infrastructure, much like the New York Times is responsible for everything they print.