4 ms·

(2)Civil liability No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of— (A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to

(2)Civil liability No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of— (A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or (B)any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).[1] Section 230 doesn't protect you from everything. It is a band aid. Specifically, it says that you have to show that you have tried to prevent malevolent content in good faith. You can't just let it sit there and fester on your servers and pretend that you're covered. Section 230 essentially requires moderation of content. They knew what was going on. They let it happen anyway. They are liable. They don't want to be liable again.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> Specifically, it says that you have to show that you have tried to prevent malevolent content in good faith. No, it doesn't, for the type of liability for hosted content, rather than its removal/restriction, that it applies to at all. > You can't just let it sit there and fester on your servers and pretend that you're covered. Yes, you can. 230 has more than one area of protection. Two of them are: (1) You (as a service provider or another user) aren't liable as a publisher for user-generated content that you aren't the origin of. 47 USC Sec. 230(c)(1) (2) As a provider, you also aren't liable for good faith efforts to restrict access to offensive content or enable content providers the ability to restrict access to offensive content. 46 USC Sec 230(c)(2) But, notably, Section 230 doesn't apply to criminal liability at all, and there is a real risk of criminal liability under the law against material support for terrorism for knowingly providing any service that you know is supporting some of the acts that have occurred or which have been reported to be now being publicly planned on social media platforms.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> Specifically, it says that you have to show that you have tried to prevent malevolent content in good faith. No, it doesn't, for the type of liability for hosted content, rather than its removal/restriction, that it applies to at all. > You can't just let it sit there and fester on your servers and pretend that you're covered. Yes, you can. 230 has more than one area of protection. Two of them are: (1) You (as a service provider or another user) aren't liable as a publisher for user-generated content that you aren't the origin of. 47 USC Sec. 230(c)(1) (2) As a provider, you also aren't liable for good faith efforts to restrict access to offensive content or enable content providers the ability to restrict access to offensive content. 46 USC Sec 230(c)(2) But, notably, Section 230 doesn't apply to criminal liability at all, and there is a real risk of criminal liability under the law against material support for terrorism for knowingly providing any service that you know is supporting some of the acts that have occurred or which have been reported to be now being publicly planned on social media platforms.