3 ms·
The CDA was later struck down by the supreme court, thanks to a challenge by the ACLU: http://epic.org/free_speech/cda/ http://epic.org/free_speech/cda/
by Tobu 15y ago
The CDA was later struck down by the supreme court, thanks to a challenge by the ACLU: http://epic.org/free_speech/cda/ http://epic.org/free_speech/cda/
- Avenger42 15y agoOnly the anti-indecency and anti-obscenity provisions were struck down. Section 230 remained, and is to this date one of the best pieces of legislation regarding the internet; it largely immunizes an online service provider against the activities of its users. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicatio...
- holman 15y agoHow does that relate to the DMCA's Safe Harbor provisions? I don't know as much about the CDA. Mostly I'm curious as you say this is "one of the best pieces of legislation", and how it relates in strength to DMCA's own provisions.
- akozak 15y agoCDA 230 explicitly excludes safe harbor for intellectual property claims. DMCA 512 provisions created a safe harbor for that gap in CDA 230 (provided you meet certain criteria).
- r00fus 15y agoKeep in mind that was before the Roberts Supreme Court, who had just recently declared Corporate Money == Speech (via Citizens United case). If SOPA passes, I hold out very little hope that this Supreme Court will do much of anything to ameliorate it .
- jacoblyles 15y agoA court that takes a free speech absolutist position in one case is more likely to protect other forms of speech, not less. I'm an extreme civil libertarian and I strongly supported the Citizens United ruling.
- gradschool 15y agoThere's no constitutional reason that the bill of rights should extend automatically to corporations (nor to robots or inanimate objects, for that matter). I'd be suspicious of any court using a first amendment argument to protect corporate interests.
- dpatru 15y agoIf I have free speech rights, and if you have free speech rights, why should we not have free speech rights if we form a corporation and speak with one (amplified) voice?
- dodedo 15y agoDo you also believe that non-profits and churches should be able to freely lobby? Currently both are severely curtailed in their political speech, unlike for-profit corporations. This is why there are two ACLU organizations: http://www.aclu.org/american-civil-liberties-union-and-aclu-foundation-what-difference http://www.aclu.org/american-civil-liberties-union-and-aclu-...
- Natsu 15y agoWait. If money == speech, can't we argue against the financial blockade parts of SOPA on free speech grounds? Probably won't work legally, but it's worth a thought...