6 ms·

That doesn't explain what "agreements" you think twitter is "breaking". There's a lot of disinformation about 230 floating around, but as the EFF page points ou

That doesn't explain what "agreements" you think twitter is "breaking". There's a lot of disinformation about 230 floating around, but as the EFF page points out, it's a broad protection. It isn't at all contingent on them behaving like a common carrier.

olivermarks 6y ago
Section 230 has been a political and legal football all year. Example for Twitter editorializing and cancelling https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1804a02d-a015-4b94-ae11-776860154802 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1804a02d-a015... Ammending S230 Bezos/WashPo '...new legislation would target Section 230, a decades-old portion of law that spares social media sites from being held liable for the posts, photos and videos uploaded to their sites by their users. The proposal would pave the way for steep sanctions on major online platforms if they don’t act to remove a range of illicit content, from child exploitation to terrorism, according to Justice Department officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity Wednesday. The agency also seeks to force tech giants to be more transparent about their content-moderation decisions and more consistent in their enforcement of them, according to a report the department released Wednesday. The move might offer the U.S. government a new avenue to probe and punish companies over allegations of political bias'. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/17/doj-barr-section-230/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/17/doj-bar...
- abhorrence 6y ago
  Twitter's actions prompting legislators to be interested in modifying section 230 is different than Twitter not acting in accordance with section 230. Section 230 explicitly allows them to moderate, and says that they do not lose their protections just because they do some moderation.

6 ms·

That doesn't explain what "agreements" you think twitter is "breaking". There's a lot of disinformation about 230 floating around, but as the EFF page points ou

by timdev2 6y ago

olivermarks 6y ago
Section 230 has been a political and legal football all year. Example for Twitter editorializing and cancelling https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1804a02d-a015-4b94-ae11-776860154802 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1804a02d-a015... Ammending S230 Bezos/WashPo '...new legislation would target Section 230, a decades-old portion of law that spares social media sites from being held liable for the posts, photos and videos uploaded to their sites by their users. The proposal would pave the way for steep sanctions on major online platforms if they don’t act to remove a range of illicit content, from child exploitation to terrorism, according to Justice Department officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity Wednesday. The agency also seeks to force tech giants to be more transparent about their content-moderation decisions and more consistent in their enforcement of them, according to a report the department released Wednesday. The move might offer the U.S. government a new avenue to probe and punish companies over allegations of political bias'. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/17/doj-barr-section-230/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/17/doj-bar...
- abhorrence 6y ago
  Twitter's actions prompting legislators to be interested in modifying section 230 is different than Twitter not acting in accordance with section 230. Section 230 explicitly allows them to moderate, and says that they do not lose their protections just because they do some moderation.