4 ms·
This actually isn't the case as long as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act exists [1]. The section has two parts, the first of which protects the pl
by bun_at_work 6y ago
This actually isn't the case as long as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act exists [1].
The section has two parts, the first of which protects the platform (Twitter, Google Play Store, FB, etc) from prosecution for user-generated content on the platform.
The second part, more relevant here, ensures the right of the platform to moderate it's users anyway it sees fit. If r/conservative can ban anyone for saying anything on the subreddit, or Parler can ban you for dropping leftist talking points, the Play Store can ban your app for enabling domestic terrorism.
[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230
- tick_tock_tick 6y agoIf the Supreme Court chooses to go down the route I have described the content of section 230 has no bearing on the discussion as ruling on this matter as a First Amendment issue would invalidate the needed parts of the Communications Decency Act.
- loceng 6y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25728005 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25728005