3 ms·
1 - They are a platform, not a publisher. Otherwise, they don't merit the safe harbor. 2 - Freedom of Speech is more important than property rights. https://e
by stcredzero 7y ago
1 - They are a platform, not a publisher. Otherwise, they don't merit the safe harbor.
2 - Freedom of Speech is more important than property rights.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama
- eclipxe 7y agoThe US Government telling Google what to post/recommend on the platform they run and pay for can be a violation of Google's first amendment right to Freedom of Speech. "[Marsh] iwas raised in the somewhat high-profile 1996 cyberlaw case, Cyber Promotions v. America Online, 948 F. Supp. 436, 442 (E.D. Pa. 1996).[1] Cyber Promotions wished to send out "mass email advertisements" to AOL customers. AOL installed software to block those emails. Cyber Promotions sued on free speech grounds and cited the Marsh case as authority for the proposition that even though AOL's servers were private property, AOL had opened them to the public to a degree sufficient that constitutional free speech protections could be applied. The federal district court disagreed, thereby paving the way for spam filters at the Internet service provider level."