A petition is calling on Pornhub to prevent non-consensual videos being posted

Re:A petition is calling on Pornhub to prevent non-consensua... by ocdtrekkie on Monday March 09, 2020 @03:49PM (#22529042)

HN has competent moderators that do a reasonable job removing illegal or harmful content. (Hi dang <3)

Section 230 protects bad actors, not good ones. Platforms that invoke Section 230 as a defensive measure are generally either refusing to moderate, or entrusting moderation entirely to algorithms, claiming they're "too big" to moderate their content.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A petition is calling on Pornhub to prevent non-consensua... by vorpalhex on Monday March 09, 2020 @03:53PM (#22529073)

> Section 230 protects bad actors, not good ones

Section 230 is why you can comment here without dang having to approve every comment you make first. It's why Facebook and Twitter and Reddit and HN can exist. It protects all actors.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A petition is calling on Pornhub to prevent non-consensua... by ocdtrekkie on Monday March 09, 2020 @04:00PM (#22529142)

This is completely untrue. Legal cases already have the concept of intent and liability. Section 230 provides blanket immunity for abuses that would otherwise be clearly defined as criminally negligent or willful behavior.

For example, without Section 230, one could define dang removing a harmful post shortly after it was flagged (usually within hours, I imagine) as best effort for a two-man moderation team, and find that PornHub, one of the most valuable web properties in the world with a significant amount of manpower, taking several weeks to take down a child porn video criminally negligent, and holding the company responsible. (Arguably, SESTA-FOSTA already enables the latter, as Section 230 no longer applies to sexual exploitation of children.)

[ Parent | on HN ]