3 ms·
Moderation is generally not required under US law. For example, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provide safe harbor provisions: 'No provider or u
by dannyw 4y ago
Moderation is generally not required under US law.
For example, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provide safe harbor provisions: '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'.
It doesn't matter if I run a site with 10 users or 100 million users: the law's provisions and protections are the same.
You are right that regulators generally strike when there is a critical mass. However, my 2c is that this is not backed by statue, and US Treasury does not have the right to sanction software code. They can certainly sanction users who use TC for money laundering, but code itself?
That's like sanctioning PGP or end-to-end encryption...
- helen___keller 4y agoSorry to be clear, I’m not claiming moderation is legally required, I’m claiming it effectively becomes necessary for a network to avoid stepping on landmines. For example, it’s impossible to run a social network website of 100 million users without users uploading illegal content. Moderation is a necessity to avoid being taken down by the feds for hosting illegal content. I agree that treasury doesn’t have the right to sanction code. They do have the right to ban exchanges from exchanging ETH. However, nobody wants that, so they’d rather try and extend their powers to effectively become ETH moderators.