The U.S. Supreme Court will hear two cases next week that could dramatically affect users’ speech rights online. Here’s what you need to know about Gonzalez v. Google, Twitter v. Taamneh, and how Section 230 protects us all. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/02/section-230-trial-heres-what-you-need-know
Section 230 is On Trial. Here's What You Need to Know.

The Supreme Court will hear two cases — Gonzalez v. Google on Tuesday, Feb. 21, and Twitter v. Taamneh on Wednesday, Feb. 22 — that could dramatically affect users’ speech rights online.

Electronic Frontier Foundation
Please note: if this goes against us, this entire Fediverse project will be in doubt. Along with democracy.

@shoq Or at least, any #fediverse outside of #mixnets.

I've been skeptical about the #clearnet's long-term prospects for a while now.

@shoq Can you explain a bit more?
@arpcomics @shoq This primer from the EFF back in December of last year helps especially if you're hosting a instance in the US: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/12/user-generated-content-and-fediverse-legal-primer
User Generated Content and the Fediverse: A Legal Primer

A growing number of people are experimenting with federated alternatives to social media like Mastodon, either by joining an “instance” hosted by someone else or creating their own instance by running the free, open-source software on a server they control. (See more about this movement and joining...

Electronic Frontier Foundation
@joeo10 @shoq thanks, I have read that before and reread the part from the 230 section down. I’m still unclear on how it’s a threat to the whole fediverse. Wouldn’t we’ll moderated instances have less to worry about?

@arpcomics @shoq It's a major threat because if #Section230 gets watered down or dies outright which is very much possible, US based websites (not just the fediverse projects hosted in the US) will have two choices: either risk liability lawsuits for content people post, or shut down completely.

It's likely the latter.

Next Week, The Supreme Court Could Destroy Everything Good About The Internet

Next week, the Supreme Court will hold the oral arguments in the Gonzalez and Taamneh cases. Gonzalez is the main show (and I’m somewhat surprised they didn’t have the hearings on the s…

Techdirt
@joeo10 @shoq What are specific examples of content that would get a small fediverse server sued? (Aside from misinformation or stochastic terrorism, et al)
@arpcomics @shoq You should read the pieces and it's accompanying ones for a fuller understanding. I'm not a lawyer nor a expert in this but I'm fully aware that this could be disasterous for the fediverse at least in the US.
@joeo10 @shoq I’ve read them and it seems like a server would be fine if moderated well. But based on your response, I might be missing something 🤷🏽‍♂️

@arpcomics @shoq Problem is that a server will likely face lawsuits if 230 is repealed which most can't afford to fight.

Sharing you this instead since you don't quite understand: https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/

Hello! You've Been Referred Here Because You're Wrong About Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act

Hello! Someone has referred you to this post because you’ve said something quite wrong about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. I apologize if it feels a bit cold and rude to resp…

Techdirt
@arpcomics @joeo10 @shoq "moderated well" won't save you from false claims of defamation. Or if *anything* goes wrong. Say two people communicate and meet up, and it leads to a fight. Without 230, expect lawsuits blaming the instance for connecting the two. There are lots and lots of frivolous, ruinous lawsuits that would result.
@mmasnick @joeo10 @shoq Thanks - that cleared it up. So what can be done about something like stochastic terrorism? And would it matter what country a server is hosted in?
@arpcomics @joeo10 @shoq not sure what you mean there? Instances are free to moderate as they wish *because* of Section 230. So they can set their own rules and moderate. If you take away 230 that becomes more risky because you might face liability

@mmasnick @joeo10 @shoq Stochastic terrorism is using disgust to incite violence. Like '[insert marginalized group here] are [negative adjective]." Repeat it enough and someone will take a gun and kill people. And this also dovetails a bit with misinformation.

Neither of these things were as a big a problem as they are now with platforms providing reach - and 230 also keeps them from having any responsibility.

We need a middle ground between 230 & no 230.

@arpcomics @joeo10 @shoq I know what the term means. But, also, there's no underlying tort or crime. So 230 plays literally zero role here. Changing it, getting rid of it, none of that helps you deal with the issue.

You're barking up the wrong tree.

@mmasnick @joeo10 @shoq So what we’d need is an explicit law that the behavior would be in violation of?
@arpcomics @joeo10 @shoq the 1st amendment is not going to allow such a law. Sorry.
@mmasnick @joeo10 @shoq The republic was a nice experiment then.
@arpcomics @joeo10 @shoq undermining the principles of free speech will contribute to a much faster decline.
@mmasnick @joeo10 @shoq That's possible. How would you combat stochastic terrorism & disinformation?
@mmasnick @joeo10 @shoq I guess the paradox of tolerance will take care of everything.
User Generated Content and the Fediverse: A Legal Primer

A growing number of people are experimenting with federated alternatives to social media like Mastodon, either by joining an “instance” hosted by someone else or creating their own instance by running the free, open-source software on a server they control. (See more about this movement and joining...

Electronic Frontier Foundation
@eff internet will change if the plantiffs win their cases.