3 ms·
Section 230(c)(2)(a) is pretty explicit in allowing moderation. Just because they are not legally liable for what users post, Congress did not want to prevent
by gizmo686 3y ago
Section 230(c)(2)(a) is pretty explicit in allowing moderation.
Just because they are not legally liable for what users post, Congress did not want to prevent platforms from going beyond their minimal legal requirements if they so chose.
The alternative us a law that says "It is unreasonable for us to expect you to perfectly police your users; but we will hold you liable for imperfectly doing so".
- gosub100 3y agoJust curious: do you believe in net neutrality? (I think that's the cause of my conflation with "common carrier"). But if censorship is a valid reason to deny service, why can't charter or AT&T say "we dont like what you're sending over our wires, so we're blocking or throttling you" ? Is it merely the fact that encryption blocks the carrier from knowing what the line is used for? Or said another way, should AT&T have the right to terminate a user's service if they were certain a user was posting, say, white supremacy?