10 ms·

Fantastic write-up. The author appears to be making more than a few assumptions about how this will play out, but I share his enthusiasm for the end of the "law

Fantastic write-up. The author appears to be making more than a few assumptions about how this will play out, but I share his enthusiasm for the end of the "lawless no-man’s-land" (as he put it) era of the internet. It comes at a great time too, as we're all eagerly awaiting the AI-generated content apocalypse. Just switch one apocalypse for a kinder, more human-friendly one. > So what happens going forward? Well we’re going to have to start thinking about what a world without this expansive reading of Section 230 looks like. There was an internet before the CDA. From what I remember, it was actually pretty rad. There can be an internet after, too. Who knows what it would look like. Maybe it will be a lot less crowded, less toxic, less triggering, and less addictive without these gigantic megacorps spending buku dollars to light up our amygdalas with nonsense all day.

tboyd47 2y ago
I read the decision. -> https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/22-3061/22-3061-2024-08-27.pdf?ts=1724792413 https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/22-306... Judge Matey's basic point of contention is that Section 230 does not provide immunity for any of TikTok's actions except "hosting" the blackout challenge video on its server. Defining it in this way may lead to a tricky technical problem for the courts to solve... While working in web, I understand "hosting" to mean the act of storing files on a computer somewhere. That's it. Is that how the courts will understand it? Or does their definition of hosting include acts that I would call serving, caching, indexing, linking, formatting, and rendering? If publishers are liable for even some of those acts, then this takes us to a very different place from where we were in 1995. Interesting times ahead for the industry.
- itsdrewmiller 2y ago
  You're reading it too literally here - the CDA applies to: >(2) Interactive computer service The term “interactive computer service” means any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions.
  - tboyd47 2y ago
    What definition of "hosting" do you think the courts would apply instead of the technical one?
    - jen20 2y ago
      I’d imagine one that reasonable people would understand to be the meaning. If a “web hosting” company told me they only stored things on a server with no way to serve it to users, I’d laugh them out the room.
      - tboyd47 2y ago
        Good point
    - itsdrewmiller 2y ago
      "hosting" isn't actually used in the text of the relevant law - it's only shorthand in the decision. If they want to know what the CDA exempts they would read the CDA along with caselaw specifically interpreting it.
      - tboyd47 2y ago
        True
HDThoreaun 2y ago
> but I share his enthusiasm for the end of the "lawless no-man’s-land" That's crazy, I feel like being a lawless no-man's land is the best part of the internet.
- tboyd47 2y ago
  You’re posting on one of the most heavily moderated forums on the internet.

tboyd47 2y ago

I read the decision. -> https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/22-3061/22-3061-2024-08-27.pdf?ts=1724792413 https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/22-306... Judge Matey's basic point of contention is that Section 230 does not provide immunity for any of TikTok's actions except "hosting" the blackout challenge video on its server. Defining it in this way may lead to a tricky technical problem for the courts to solve... While working in web, I understand "hosting" to mean the act of storing files on a computer somewhere. That's it. Is that how the courts will understand it? Or does their definition of hosting include acts that I would call serving, caching, indexing, linking, formatting, and rendering? If publishers are liable for even some of those acts, then this takes us to a very different place from where we were in 1995. Interesting times ahead for the industry.

itsdrewmiller 2y ago
You're reading it too literally here - the CDA applies to: >(2) Interactive computer service The term “interactive computer service” means any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions.
- tboyd47 2y ago
  What definition of "hosting" do you think the courts would apply instead of the technical one?
  - jen20 2y ago
    I’d imagine one that reasonable people would understand to be the meaning. If a “web hosting” company told me they only stored things on a server with no way to serve it to users, I’d laugh them out the room.
    - tboyd47 2y ago
      Good point
  - itsdrewmiller 2y ago
    "hosting" isn't actually used in the text of the relevant law - it's only shorthand in the decision. If they want to know what the CDA exempts they would read the CDA along with caselaw specifically interpreting it.
    - tboyd47 2y ago
      True

HDThoreaun 2y ago

> but I share his enthusiasm for the end of the "lawless no-man’s-land" That's crazy, I feel like being a lawless no-man's land is the best part of the internet.

tboyd47 2y ago
You’re posting on one of the most heavily moderated forums on the internet.