11–20 of 261 posts
Might help to bring more popularity/attention to this story if "Section 230" could be explained in English in the title....
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230
EFF's view: https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're probably correct on your first assumption that this is campaign related and most likely won't go anywhere. Legislation is the only 'real' way to change the section.
Executive orders are increasingly used to do end-runs around legislation, so don't count them out.
Even Trump and Biden are united in gutting the one law, that is uniquely responsible for the proliferation of the open internet.
Putting aside the larger issue of unaccountable platforms, what is the rationale for seeing this as anything more than some ineffectual campaign stunt? I don't see anything in S230 that delegates judgment to the FCC or any part of the executive branch. Basically Trump is claiming to perform the functions of the legislature and judiciary by decree. I wonder if this is the natural extension of the two political teams t…
You're probably correct on your first assumption that this is campaign related and most likely won't go anywhere. Legislation is the only 'real' way to change the section.
Basically, Congress passes laws that grant powers to the Executive to ... execute .. the law and enforce it. These laws instruct the Executive Branch to write administrative policy which is then enforced -- this is the reason, for instance, that the Department of Education could unilaterally rescind the Obama era "Dear Colleague" letter.
The laws that are passed, including Section 230 and the rest of the DMCA, grant the Administration broad powers to write policy from the law in places where the law is insufficiently defined. This is why the Section II/Section III reclassification (called "Net Neutrality" by its proponents, though the actual "Neutrality" is of course controversial) could be done unilaterally by Pai and it's the same reason that the FCC is open to re-interpret the law as written in order to write administrative policy.
If Congress doesn't like the new policy, they can pass a new law that better defines the Executive's role in enforcing their law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Executive orders are increasingly used to do end-runs around legislation, so don't count them out.
But the existing end runs are generally for things that the Executive already has administrative control over, refuses to abide by restrictions/oversight, and suffers no repercussions - similar to how none of Trump's personal crimes are being prosecuted while he's president. What are the possible results here? Finding sympathetic (ie corrupt) courts that will straight up ignore what the law says and defer to the exec…
We have a new standard for how much such technicalities as separation of power matter in America, better get used to it. It's not like Democrats will fix all that even if they sweep the election, they'll just sit on their hands as usual.
Anyway, if you don't want to use Twitter (just to read an image of a real document)... The link to Ajit Pai's comment is https://www.fcc.gov/document/chairman-pai-statement-section-... where you can view it as a DOCX, PDF, or glorious TXT.
If you are upset by Ajit Pai's actions or Twitter's, here's the RSS feed(s) alternative for the FCC: https://www.fcc.gov/news-events/rss-feeds-and-email-updates-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're probably correct on your first assumption that this is campaign related and most likely won't go anywhere. Legislation is the only 'real' way to change the section.
You clearly don't understand how [Administrative Law]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_law ) works, which is understandable, because it's a complex morass. We have, largely, FDR to thank for this, with the creation of all of the alphabet soup agencies. Basically, Congress passes laws that grant powers to the Executive to ... execute .. the law and enforce it. These laws instruct the Executive Branch to w…
Section 230 is not such a law. It creates a civil liability shield for interactive computer services and states who that applies to and how it is to be used. There is nothing in it for the Executive to execute. It is only executed when someone raises it as a defense in a court case, and it is the judiciary that decide what it means.
The FCC can interpret it all they want, but that interpretation will be at best persuasive authority in any court case involving the application of 230.
I always find it disappointing (ironic?) that so much government communication is using private platforms - even if it's a "publisher"/newspaper. Even if I follow a mailing list or RSS feed I'm worried that some stuff might only be put on Twitter (especially with Police/LE activity where frequent updates are useful). Anyway, if you don't want to use Twitter (just to read an image of a real document)... The link to Aj…