Ari CohnAs predicted by pretty much everyone, many on the left now seem to be picking up the "publisher or platform" canard.
ML2@AriCohn Well that's disappointing
The Cleric@AriCohn bad legal takes know no party or politics. They will always be where wishcasting meets Dunning Kruger.
Guy Berger@AriCohn When a comms service becomes subject to the arbitrary rule of an owner's prejudices on who can participate, doesn't it become more publisher-like than platform in character?
Peter Principle@GuyBerger @AriCohn My understanding is that it makes no difference for Section 230 purposes.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/12/publisher-or-platform-it-doesnt-matter
The EU, however, may take a different view.
Publisher or Platform? It Doesn't Matter.
“You have to choose: are you a platform or a publisher?”It’s the question that makes us pull out our hair and roll our eyes. It’s the question that makes us want to shout from the rooftops “IT DOESN’T MATTER. YOU DON’T HAVE TO CHOOSE”We’ll say it plainly here: there is no legal significance to...
Asa Zernik אסא צרניק@GuyBerger @AriCohn the point is that it doesn't matter. Internet services have liability protections regardless of which bucket they fall into.
hybrid havoc
MikeasaService@GuyBerger @AriCohn
1) There is no "publisher/platform" distinction in the law.
2) Sec 230 covers publishers if they meet the criteria in the law.
3) See #1.
1) There is no "publisher/platform" distinction in the law.
2) Sec 230 covers publishers if they meet the criteria in the law.
3) See #1.
PsTeq1993@AriCohn Almost like both sides are disingenuous.
@PsTeq1993 @AriCohn
Both sides are prone to motivated reasoning and wishcasting about the law. That isn't the same as "being disingenuous" at all.
Both sides are prone to motivated reasoning and wishcasting about the law. That isn't the same as "being disingenuous" at all.