Quote: (04-03-2019 03:41 PM)godfather dust Wrote:
Quote: (04-03-2019 02:17 PM)Darth Wrote:
I seem to remember that there is some legal precedent that once something like Twitter because a widespread enough public forum, legal restrictions can be placed on their ability to censor users. I don't remember the details.
Maybe someone else can find the case. I only read it in passing when a friend got screwed over and suspended by Twitter after he figuratively beat the mental crap out of some libtard, figuratively speaking of course, in a debate on Twitter. The thing is the libtard was using all sort of invective and so on, while my friend never said a harsh word but HE was the one that got suspended and he quit twitter in disgust.
They are allowed to exist because they are platforms not publishers. If they censor they become publishers and legally responsible for the content posted, which means they would be sued out of existence very quicky... Hundreds of millions in lawsuits by people insulted/libeled etc on the platforms.
I'm not a lawyer and that's a fairly bad explanation, maybe someone else can chime in.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. §230, absolves platform providers from liability for copyright violations, defamation, threats, etc.
Quote:Quote:
(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
(2) Civil liability
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).
And Nunes is a moron for suing those anonymous accounts and Twitter.