3 ms·
The user who made the bonkers content is liable.
by whoitwas 2y ago
The user who made the bonkers content is liable.
- stackskipton 2y agoSure, but with other forms of media, the publisher is liable as well about bonkers content with certain exceptions. This is what most of Section 230 fight is about. Some people, myself included, would say "No, Facebook is selecting content that doesn't involve user choice, they are drifting into publisher territory and thus should not be 100% immune to liability." EDIT: I forgot, Section 230 has also been used by Online Ad Publishers to hide their lack of moderation with scam ads.
- vundercind 2y agoReading the law, it sure seems to be aimed at protecting services like ISPs, web hosts, CDNs/caches, email hosts, et c, not organizations promoting and amplifying specific content they’ve allowed users to post. It’s never seemed to me that applying 230 to, say, the Facebook feed or maybe even to Google ads is definitely required by or in the spirit of the law, but more like something we just accidentally ended up doing.
- whoitwas 2y agoI thought safe harbor was the relevant statute here (section 512 of DMCA)?
- vundercind 2y agoThat’s narrowly concerned with copyright infringement, no?
- whoitwas 2y agoYeah. It's been a while. This is interesting