FCC to move ahead with 'rulemaking' on Section 230

Re:FCC to move ahead with 'rulemaking' on Section 230 by triceratops on Friday October 16, 2020 @03:08AM (#24798341)

Even "common carriers" don't have to carry everything. ISPs will shut down your Internet if they find you running a server at home (not illegal, but against their ToS). The phone company will do the same thing if they find you used nefarious means to place long-distance calls. The common thread is that they act to prevent misuse of their network. You're arguing that social media companies should not be able to do the same.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC to move ahead with 'rulemaking' on Section 230 by stale2002 on Friday October 16, 2020 @06:44PM (#24805720)

> Even "common carriers" don't have to carry everything.

Looking at your comments it seems like you at least agree that common carriers are subject to some laws.

Great! It seems like you agree with me that there are laws and things that common carriers have to do, and that there is content that they are required to carry some content.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC to move ahead with 'rulemaking' on Section 230 by triceratops on Friday October 16, 2020 @07:01PM (#24805833)

And yet you don't seem to accept that common carriers perform moderation too. Nor have you acknowledged that ISPs aren't common carriers and the current FCC made it that way. Nor have you acknowledged the hypocrisy of this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC to move ahead with 'rulemaking' on Section 230 by stale2002 on Friday October 16, 2020 @08:48PM (#24806531)

> that common carriers perform moderation

I've specifically clarified that common carriers are subject to certain restrictions on what they can do, and am saying that those restrictions should apply to social media, with a law change.

> the current FCC

My specific claim is that the law should be changed such that they are subject to common carrier laws.

Social media companies are not currently subject to them, but I am saying that the law should be changed so that they are.

If you want to say that the law should be changed so that ISPs are subject to those as well, then go ahead and argue that, but that does not contradict what I am arguing for.

Anyway, I am just glad at this point that you agree that common carriers are subject to certain restrictions, which was my point the whole time. And I am saying that those same restrictions, that you agree exist, should be applied to social media companies, via a law change.

[ Parent | on HN ]