Of course Cocaine Bitch wants to support repeal of 230. Ending section 230 outright will expose website owners to lawsuits for user-posted content. All it will take is one troll to post something illegal and the site is liable.
Facebook, Google, and so on will be able to survive with their huge legal teams. Not only that, they will likely respond by introducing even more censorship for "legal protection".
Websites without large legal teams? Well, you tell me how fair the legal system has been lately.
At a very minimum Section 230 must be amended to eliminate the “otherwise objectionable” phrase from the list of items protected for removal, and introduce strong protections for political speech. See the linked article for a much better synopsis.
No, they will censor and be considered a publisher or not censor and be considered a platform. Platform will be protected. Publisher is liable. No more straddling the fence.
Of course Cocaine Bitch wants to support repeal of 230. Ending section 230 outright will expose website owners to lawsuits for user-posted content. All it will take is one troll to post something illegal and the site is liable.
Facebook, Google, and so on will be able to survive with their huge legal teams. Not only that, they will likely respond by introducing even more censorship for "legal protection".
Websites without large legal teams? Well, you tell me how fair the legal system has been lately.
At a very minimum Section 230 must be amended to eliminate the “otherwise objectionable” phrase from the list of items protected for removal, and introduce strong protections for political speech. See the linked article for a much better synopsis.
Section 230 text: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230
No, they will censor and be considered a publisher or not censor and be considered a platform. Platform will be protected. Publisher is liable. No more straddling the fence.