4 ms·
I think it's super safe to assume that the Internet would not have been able to grow the way that it did if Section 230 didn't exist. Websites like Youtube woul
by Taek 4y ago
I think it's super safe to assume that the Internet would not have been able to grow the way that it did if Section 230 didn't exist. Websites like Youtube would have been crushed by moderation duty and legal liability immediately, and the Internet we'd have today would more closely resemble a curated newspaper than the content free-for-all that we benefit from now.
- nonethewiser 4y agoBut wouldn’t it have grown just as much? Wouldn’t it have been ubiquitous and crucial? Perhaps social media sites would have had a rougher go but what would we have lost with that?
- basch 4y agoYou never would have had the growth of web hosting. Everything would be self hosted out of home basements, and ISPs would disconnect anybody remotely questionable.
- goodSteveramos 4y agoISPs and web hosting do not need section 230 to protect them from liability specifically because they do not perform content moderation. So removing 230 would not obligate them to begin doing so.
- basch 4y ago230 doesnt just cover blocking/moderation. I would surmise trigger warnings and nsfw tags count as screening. >230(c)(1) 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. 230(c)(2) goes on to clarify that moderation does not make you speaker of what remains, but that is a subpoint. (c)(1) would still cover everything if (c)(2) didnt exist. ISP's are definitely covered under the "access software provider" definition, and most assuredly the "interactive computer service" definition.
- goodSteveramos 4y agoCorrect. However notice that ISPs do not and have never inserter Not safe for work warnings into webpages. Also notice that ISPs do not sell software.
- inglor_cz 4y agoWhat if the Internet developed anyway, but with many more services located outside the US jurisdiction? Most developed countries in the world were toying with networks in the 1990s.
- Animats 4y agoNo, it would just have made aggregation sites hard. Businesses and individuals with their own web sites would be where they are now. Services that display sites for others, such as Wordpress, would be fine. Indexing and search sites, such as Yahoo and early Google, would be fine. Sites that just handle communication, as IRC or email, would be fine. It's only sites that combine the works of others, and especially those that monetize it, which would face liability. In other words, social media.
- thefreeman 4y agoI think you are severely underplaying the massive role social media played / plays in peoples usage of the internet. To a lot of people it "is" the internet as far as they know. It is very likely there is never an explosion of usage if not for social media which in turn would effect how much money and time was invested in all of those other things you mentioned. Also I don't think you can definitively say that search engines and directories would not be effected, if they indexed some sort of illegal content they could very like have been sued for linking to it.
- bryanlarsen 4y agoI think a type of social media would have happened without 230. Blogrings and linkbacks and your aunt that always emails you funny things she found were primitive social media that relied less on 230. They would have evolved and thrived without competition from Facebook.