U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
1–10 of 126 posts
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#2Good. It is bizarre to me that one could post literal death threats online endlessly without fear of any consquences, yet if you were to yell the same threats in a public location, the police would be summoned. My main concern would be that any regulations that punish companies for allowing threatening material on their site punish in proportion to the audience who was exposed to it. Big fines for big tech, tiny fines for a startup.
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#3I'm generally fairly hesitant about restricting 230 protection, but removing it for paid content, such as ads, makes a lot of sense to me.
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#4While this looks good on paper, it would severely hinder free speech on these platforms if not already.
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#5WashPo has a more detailed article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/02/04/technolog...
Correction as of 12:57 pm EST: Based on a comment below, I see now that the link above is talking about a different bill from Senator Klobuchar with an anti-trust focus. She's been busy.
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#6I think we should do the reverse: No moderation outside of court orders or you risk losing 230 protections.
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#7I think we should do the reverse: No moderation outside of court orders or you risk losing 230 protections.
[deleted]
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#8While this looks good on paper, it would severely hinder free speech on these platforms if not already.
When you say "free speech", are you referring to the First Amendment (1A)? If so, are you claiming that the bill would conflict with 1A? If so, on what basis?
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#9>The bill would make it clear that Section 230, [...] does not apply to ads or other paid content
seems reasonable
>does not impair the enforcement of civil rights laws
what types of civil rights abuses were protected by section 230? I'm under the impression that saying/posting racial slurs isn't illegal.
> and does not bar wrongful-death actions.
what's the current bar for suing an establishment for wrongful death? if a bunch of radicals met at a bar and plotted to murder someone, would the bar be responsible if they didn't intervene?
Re: U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms
#10>Called the SAFE TECH Act, the bill would mark the latest effort to make social media companies like Alphabet Inc’s Google, Twitter Inc and Facebook Inc more accountable for “enabling cyber-stalking, targeted harassment, and discrimination on their platforms,” Senators Mark Warner, Mazie Hirono and Amy Klobuchar said in a statement.
Ehh.
Slippery slope theory, if you don't want to be subject to these behaviors don't use social media. While a good bar tender will cut off patrons who are clearly drunk, if you then hop in your truck and run into a tree, you can't sue the bar.