9 ms·

> Yes, Internet companies will have to go to court more. That's a good thing. Isn’t this textbook regulatory capture? Only companies that can afford to go to c

> Yes, Internet companies will have to go to court more. That's a good thing. Isn’t this textbook regulatory capture? Only companies that can afford to go to court will continue to exist. Or move to IPFS, I guess. We should do a better job as a society in using the Web as a tool rather than letting the Web use us as attention engines. We used to tell people “don’t believe everything you read on the Internet,” “don’t message strangers,” and “Mom hang up the phone I’m trying to play Quake!” Maybe we should bring that mindset back rather than trying to make hosting user content financially infeasible.

ocdtrekkie 4y ago
So, there's a thing that once you look for you see everywhere in these arguments: The giant corporations' first claim is that regulating them will hurt small companies. They say this all the time, about every regulation. Of course, since companies act with self-interest, if it really helped them and hurt smaller competitors, they would be for the law. Claims regulating big businesses hurt small businesses are without merit and should be discarded. The law has, and can continue to develop, reasonable laws that protect people from frivolous lawsuits. Anti-SLAPP laws are key, and we should continue to raise penalties on larger players using them to bully smaller companies. And bear in mind, the cost of lawyers is... pretty relative to the business in question. If Microsoft and Joe's Blog go to court, Microsoft's spending 300x the cost on their lawyers, and if the case is completely bull----, Joe is still going to win on merits of the case. Blanket immunity isn't really a solution here, and thousands of people have died over the past few decades of experimenting with allowing it. But I guess those deaths were worth it if it saved someone some legal fees.

9 ms·

> Yes, Internet companies will have to go to court more. That's a good thing. Isn’t this textbook regulatory capture? Only companies that can afford to go to c

by just-ok 4y ago

ocdtrekkie 4y ago
So, there's a thing that once you look for you see everywhere in these arguments: The giant corporations' first claim is that regulating them will hurt small companies. They say this all the time, about every regulation. Of course, since companies act with self-interest, if it really helped them and hurt smaller competitors, they would be for the law. Claims regulating big businesses hurt small businesses are without merit and should be discarded. The law has, and can continue to develop, reasonable laws that protect people from frivolous lawsuits. Anti-SLAPP laws are key, and we should continue to raise penalties on larger players using them to bully smaller companies. And bear in mind, the cost of lawyers is... pretty relative to the business in question. If Microsoft and Joe's Blog go to court, Microsoft's spending 300x the cost on their lawyers, and if the case is completely bull----, Joe is still going to win on merits of the case. Blanket immunity isn't really a solution here, and thousands of people have died over the past few decades of experimenting with allowing it. But I guess those deaths were worth it if it saved someone some legal fees.