2 ms·
I haven't looked at this in a bit, but I thought that companies are exempt from their users' speech only if they don't make editorial decisions (and Twitter doe
by solardev 3y ago
I haven't looked at this in a bit, but I thought that companies are exempt from their users' speech only if they don't make editorial decisions (and Twitter does, like reddit or HN or Slashdot). Am I mistaken?
- zimpenfish 3y agoCompanies are allowed to moderate their platforms under Section 230. https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/21/18700605/section-230-internet-law-twenty-six-words-that-created-the-internet-jeff-kosseff-interview https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/21/18700605/section-230-inte...
- solardev 3y agoThank you!
- bbatsell 3y agoThat is something oft-repeated in conservative circles without a shred of basis in law. In fact, Section 230(c)(2) of the CDA does the exact opposite. It was written to explicitly _grant_ immunity when companies moderate in good faith. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230
- solardev 3y agoOK, thank you for the correction! I'll read it and learn more.
- function_seven 3y agoEDIT: I replied to this before refreshing and seeing sibling replies. So I guess all I have to add is another link. On the contrary, Section 230 is what allows platforms to make some editorial decisions without thereby assuming liability for all user-generated content. Before 230, what you said was true. I like this explanation: https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/ https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referre...
- solardev 3y agoIt's a good explanation, and more readable than the Wikipedia! Thanks for that.