4 ms·

> Interesting position - when somebody posts illegal content on YouTube, they are not liable, it’s not their speech. > But when I want to post something they d

> Interesting position - when somebody posts illegal content on YouTube, they are not liable, it’s not their speech. > But when I want to post something they don’t like, suddenly it’s their freedom of speech to remove it. There is no contradiction there. Imagine a forum about knitting. Someone, who has it in for the owners of this knitting forum (or perhaps even just a SPAM bot) starts posting illegal, or even just non-knitting content on this forum. The entire purpose of the forum is to be a community about knitting. Why is it the legal or moral responsibility of the knitting forum to host SPAM content? And why should they be legally liable for someone else posting content on their platform? You're equating specific pieces of content with the platform as a whole. There is no reality where I will accept that if I create something. I spend and risk my money on web hosting. I write the code. I put something out there... that other people get to dictate what content I have to distribute. That's an evil reality to contemplate. I don't want to live in that world. I certainly wont' do business under those terms. You're effectively trying to give other people an ultimatum in order to extract value from them that you did not earn and have no claim to. You're saying that if they don't host content that they don't want to distribute that they should be legally liable for anything that anyone uploads. The two don't connect at all. Anyone is, and should be free to create any kind of online service where they pick and choose what is or is not allowed. That shouldn't then subject them to criminal or civil liability because of how others decide to use that product or service. Imagine if that weird concept were applied to offline things, like kitchen knives. A kitchen knife manufacturer is perfectly within their rights to say "This product is intended to be used for culinary purposes and no other. If we find out that you are using it to do other things, we will stop doing business with you forever." That doesn't then make them liable for people who use their product for other purposes.

andrepd 1y ago
The issue is that the knitting forum is a different beast from youtube. The latter is a platform. Its scale makes it QUALITATIVELY different. And there's network effects, there's dumping behaviour, there's preinstalls on every phone, there's integration with the ad behemoth, all to make sure it remains a platform.
dcow 1y ago
This isn’t really what’s being argued. We’re not talking about a knitting forum. We’re talking about content neutral hosting platforms. There is a distinction in the law. If you want to not be liable for the content posted to your platform then you may not moderate or censor it seems like a fair compromise to me. Either you are knitting forum carefully cultivating your content and thus liable for what people see there, or you are a neutral hosting service provider. Right now we let people platforms be whichever favors their present goal or narrative without considering the impact such duplicity has on the public users.
- gspencley 1y ago
  > We’re talking about content neutral hosting platforms. There is no such thing as a "content neutral hosting platform." I know that people like to talk about social media services in the same umbrella as the concept of "common carrier", which is reserved for things like mail service and telecommunications infrastructure. And that might be what you're conflating here. If you're not, then please point me to the law, in any country even, where "content neutral hosting platform" is a legal term defined. > If you want to not be liable for the content posted to your platform then you may not moderate or censor it seems like a fair compromise to me. Compensation for what? The "platform" built something themselves. They made it. They are offering it on the market. If anyone is due compensation, it is them. No matter how much you don't like them. You didn't build it. You could have, maybe. But you didn't. I bet you didn't even try. But they did. And they succeeded at it. So where does anyone get off demanding "compensation" from them just for bringing something useful valuable into existence? That is a pretty messed up way of looking at things IMO. It is the mindset of a thief. > Either you are knitting forum carefully cultivating your content and thus liable for what people see there, Thank you for conceding my argument and shining a spotlight on how ridiculous this is. You agree that according to your world view, the knitting forum should be liable for the content others post on it just because they are enforcing that things stay on topic. Even just for removing SPAM bot posts this would expose them to this liability. > Right now we let people platforms be whichever favors their present goal or narrative without considering the impact such duplicity has on the public users. The beautiful thing about freedom is that along as people don't infringe upon the rights of others, they don't need your permission to just go build things and exist. The YouTube creators didn't have to ask you to "allow" them to build something useful and valuable. They just went and did it. And that's how it should be. I get that certain creators run into trouble with the TOS. Hell, I've tried to create an Instagram account on several occasions and it gets suspended before I can even use it. And when I appeal or try to ask "why?" I never get answers. It's frustrating. But the difference between you and me, is I don't think that people who build and create things and bring valuable shit into existence owe me something just by virtue of their existence.
ClumsyPilot 1y ago
> There is no reality where I will accept that… Welcome to the club > if I create something. I spend and risk my money on web hosting. I write the code... You can create a forum in 20 minutes, it’s all open source and I did that when I was 14 All the ‘risk’ and ‘writing code’ is about fighting other platforms for attention, not providing a consumer good. > ultimatum… in order to extract value from them that you did not earn I am the consumer, the market exists for me and I pay for the whole party. If a business that harms customers is called a crime syndicate. You might see this ultimatum in other areas too, like “you can’t sell baby food with lead in it, or you go to prison”
Slava_Propanei 1y ago
[dead]

andrepd 1y ago

The issue is that the knitting forum is a different beast from youtube. The latter is a platform. Its scale makes it QUALITATIVELY different. And there's network effects, there's dumping behaviour, there's preinstalls on every phone, there's integration with the ad behemoth, all to make sure it remains a platform.

dcow 1y ago

This isn’t really what’s being argued. We’re not talking about a knitting forum. We’re talking about content neutral hosting platforms. There is a distinction in the law. If you want to not be liable for the content posted to your platform then you may not moderate or censor it seems like a fair compromise to me. Either you are knitting forum carefully cultivating your content and thus liable for what people see there, or you are a neutral hosting service provider. Right now we let people platforms be whichever favors their present goal or narrative without considering the impact such duplicity has on the public users.

gspencley 1y ago
> We’re talking about content neutral hosting platforms. There is no such thing as a "content neutral hosting platform." I know that people like to talk about social media services in the same umbrella as the concept of "common carrier", which is reserved for things like mail service and telecommunications infrastructure. And that might be what you're conflating here. If you're not, then please point me to the law, in any country even, where "content neutral hosting platform" is a legal term defined. > If you want to not be liable for the content posted to your platform then you may not moderate or censor it seems like a fair compromise to me. Compensation for what? The "platform" built something themselves. They made it. They are offering it on the market. If anyone is due compensation, it is them. No matter how much you don't like them. You didn't build it. You could have, maybe. But you didn't. I bet you didn't even try. But they did. And they succeeded at it. So where does anyone get off demanding "compensation" from them just for bringing something useful valuable into existence? That is a pretty messed up way of looking at things IMO. It is the mindset of a thief. > Either you are knitting forum carefully cultivating your content and thus liable for what people see there, Thank you for conceding my argument and shining a spotlight on how ridiculous this is. You agree that according to your world view, the knitting forum should be liable for the content others post on it just because they are enforcing that things stay on topic. Even just for removing SPAM bot posts this would expose them to this liability. > Right now we let people platforms be whichever favors their present goal or narrative without considering the impact such duplicity has on the public users. The beautiful thing about freedom is that along as people don't infringe upon the rights of others, they don't need your permission to just go build things and exist. The YouTube creators didn't have to ask you to "allow" them to build something useful and valuable. They just went and did it. And that's how it should be. I get that certain creators run into trouble with the TOS. Hell, I've tried to create an Instagram account on several occasions and it gets suspended before I can even use it. And when I appeal or try to ask "why?" I never get answers. It's frustrating. But the difference between you and me, is I don't think that people who build and create things and bring valuable shit into existence owe me something just by virtue of their existence.

ClumsyPilot 1y ago

> There is no reality where I will accept that… Welcome to the club > if I create something. I spend and risk my money on web hosting. I write the code... You can create a forum in 20 minutes, it’s all open source and I did that when I was 14 All the ‘risk’ and ‘writing code’ is about fighting other platforms for attention, not providing a consumer good. > ultimatum… in order to extract value from them that you did not earn I am the consumer, the market exists for me and I pay for the whole party. If a business that harms customers is called a crime syndicate. You might see this ultimatum in other areas too, like “you can’t sell baby food with lead in it, or you go to prison”

Slava_Propanei 1y ago

[dead]