You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

bobdole9 ago

Help a retard. I thought 230 was "publisher vs. platform"...Twitter and YouTube making commentary on user's posts would reclassify them from a platform to a publisher.

Putt doesn't do anything in reguards to editing posts, having comments about the content other than NSFW and collapsed comments if its downvoated. I don't see how Voat could be considered a publisher in any way compared to the commentary Twitter adds.

NorthSeaPagan ago

https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230

https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/230

Section 230 gives "bloggers" (i.e. web hosts, a.k.a. Atko, Puttitout, Null, etc.) legal immunity for any content that is posted to their sites which violates federal law and any comments/posts made to their sites by users that violate federal law. If Section 230 is removed then sites like Voat, Kiwifarms, Stormfront, etc. will all be liable to legal prosecution if one of their users breaks federal laws. So if Section 230 is repealed and someone on one of these sites decides to "do a terror" the site admins could end up facing charges (more or less).

ZOGnold Trump tried to tell people that "repealing Section 230 will hurt big tech" but, it was a flat our lie, repealing Section 230 would basically give the power to censor and control the internet to the courts which, as we have already seen, will always side with big tech and always attack sites like Voat.

hang_em_high ago

How can you decentralize or offshore it to where laws don't mean jack shit? That's got to be the future right?