Re:Full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2k stimulus checks
by mcphage on Tuesday December 29, 2020 @11:39PM
(#25578621)
> It also protects other users from liability.
What liability does it protect me (as a user of Facebook and Twitter) from?
Re:Full repeal of Section 230 to push for $2k stimulus checks
by dragonwriter on Wednesday December 30, 2020 @02:47AM
(#25579525)
> What liability does it protect me (as a user of Facebook and Twitter) from?
Under (e.g.) defamation law without section 230, actions you take on the platform which affect the distribution of defamatory statements could make you liable for defamation, including when the “interaction” is hosting a space on the platform where it is posted, like a Facebook page or wall, or even the parent post on which it is posted as a comment.
It also protects other users from liability.
> It does not “give” companies the ability to not publish something, ie censor what someone posts.
It does in fact make this legally easier, because any content moderation without 230 would give the firm publisher liability (basically, presumptive liability for illegal content) rather than distributor liability (in which they are only liable for content for which they have notice of illegality). Under the plain text of 230 they are protected against publisher liability if they comply with it (and under precedent they are also protected against distributor liability.)
> FB and Twitter have the resources to fight the lawsuits
No, they don't. They are unwinnable (Was it false? Was it harmful? Was it on the platform? You lose.) FB and Twitter are just big money piñatas without 230, until they radically retool the structure of their platforms.