3 ms·
to go further: let’s say i don’t even define a purpose for the app but just leave it open to users to define their metadata labeling scheme and all the app does
by coderatlarge 11mo ago
to go further: let’s say i don’t even define a purpose for the app but just leave it open to users to define their metadata labeling scheme and all the app does is index the videos labeled in a common way. perhaps endusers agree on redit or on some wiki how they will label posts. the app just traverses the labeling scheme and provides some basic viewing and searching locally; without a server involved beyond youtube. i’m just wondering whether this new situation essentially criminalizes metadata.
- trillic 11mo agocriminalization of aggregation
- coderatlarge 11mo agois there some point of app abstraction where i can claim section 230 protection?
- trillic 11mo agoWhen users create the lists and you don’t moderate them (outside of illegal content and “profanity”. But “profanity” is similar to the slippery slope of a “targeted group”.
- coderatlarge 11mo agook so , in theory, “Mark” (the author of the original app in question in the original post) could change some of the verbiage around his app and resubmit claiming 230?
- heavyset_go 11mo agoS230 allows for any amount of moderation. Providers of interactive computer services are not liable for user-uploaded content.
- amanaplanacanal 11mo agoSection 230 doesn't protect you from Apple or Google.
- pjc50 11mo agoThe drone strikes app tried to use the "metadata" excuse. https://tech.yahoo.com/general/articles/apple-finally-approved-app-tracks-190526029.html https://tech.yahoo.com/general/articles/apple-finally-approv... The underlying principle is not complicated; Apple can and will ban any app they don't like.
- potato3732842 11mo agoThe judge will say "you knew what you were doing" same as they do for all the torrent hosts.