3 ms·
There have been a number of articles on this today and the Techdirt one is the most extensive in terms of citing the key parts of the ruling and highlighting pr
by xoa 5y ago
There have been a number of articles on this today and the Techdirt one is the most extensive in terms of citing the key parts of the ruling and highlighting previous precedent from what I've seen, but the title had to be shrunk to fit HN's character limit. Important to note as well that Section 230, while utterly vital and also under attack right now, doesn't feature in this at all. This is purely about the 1A. This ruling also addressed a number of the typical tropes that regrettably appear on HN. An expected but still very nicely thorough ruling, more so then the Florida one.
- finite_jest 5y agoWell, it's a ruling by a judge appointed by President Obama [1][2] who is very sympathetic to leftwing causes [3], so he has his biases. My own personal (non-expert) take on this is that if we want to preserve free expression, we should perhaps bring back a version of fairness doctrine (or right of reply) targeted at platforms (which I think were killed by President Reagan, unfortunately). Do you happen to happen to have a link to the ruling on DeSantis's version of the law? I thought they were still waiting for the appeals. I also thought DeSantis's rendition was more clever, as they tried to frame the selective enforcement of the ToS as a form of fraud. I would be interested in knowing your opinion on this. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Pitman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Pitman [2]: There are studies have that confirm that who judges appointed by Democrats and Republicans do indeed make different decisions. [3]: I think he is the same judge who blocked the heartbeat law and the boycott ban.