4 ms·
They are partially responsible. They are not liable because the law doesn't currently enforce that responsibility. Law != moral responsibility.
by hackerlight 4y ago
They are partially responsible. They are not liable because the law doesn't currently enforce that responsibility. Law != moral responsibility.
- throwaway356cda 4y agoResponsible in the same way that a grocery store is responsible for selling a tomato that was thrown? Title II Common Carrier, government-granted monopolies ISP: Internet Service Provider Section 230 Information Service Provider Business of Public Accommodation You can't make them serve a gay cake to a gay wedding. You don't need a public guest list for a private party at a private golf club. You can't make them let problem gamblers in (at the now-at-least-federally-legal and now-online) casino. Per the bench
- hackerlight 4y agoObviously there's a spectrum of responsibility, with some companies bearing more and others less. The grocery store is a poor analogy though because they're not actively facilitating tomatoes being thrown. If they incentivized tomatoes being thrown through social mechanics then I would place more blame on their shoulders. Also you're talking about current law here. I'm not interested in the current state of affairs. I understand Twitter and Facebook aren't breaking the law if they facilitate organization of a genocide. I'm talking about what should be the case. Perhaps laws need to be updated.