4 ms·
I assume you're getting downvoted at least in part because people disagree with you (I didn't downvote FWIW), but you're also factually wrong about Section 230
by reissbaker 6y ago
I assume you're getting downvoted at least in part because people disagree with you (I didn't downvote FWIW), but you're also factually wrong about Section 230 protections. Section 230 doesn't give blanket immunity to publishing illegal content: it only protects against civil violations, not criminal.
- mikedilger 6y ago> Section 230 doesn't give blanket immunity to publishing illegal content: it only protects against civil violations, not criminal. Of course you are correct, but that doesn't make me factually wrong. You are talking about publishing illegal content. But (c)(1) "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." And I missed DMCA takedowns.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]