4 ms·
Stratton Oakmont, Inc. vs. Prodigy before Section 230
- rektide 4y agoThe ultra-predatory firm in Wolf of Wall Street. This is such an incredible & vile court decision, that having any self-governance at all make you liable for your user's speech. It's what the modern anti-Section 230 folks seem to want & seeing a case of it here is wild, ugly beyond imagining.
- otterley 4y agoTraditionally defamation law has always held republishers of content liable for defamatory content they distributed, regardless of whether they authored the material themselves. If you wrote a letter to the editor of a newspaper saying "P is a child molester", the newspaper printed and distributed it, and it wasn't true, P could sue not only you but also the newspaper for damages. This law was totally uncontroversial until the dawn of public electronic communications providers (pre-Internet, even) and automated republication systems like bulletin boards. That's why newspapers also continue to do useful things like fact checking.