Author Topic: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230  (Read 1013 times)

bedlamite

  • Hold my beer and watch this!
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,769
  • Ack! PLBTTPHBT!
« Last Edit: June 20, 2019, 12:23:52 PM by bedlamite »
A plan is just a list of things that doesn't happen.
Is defenestration possible through the overton window?

Scout26

  • I'm a leaf on the wind.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25,997
  • I spent a week in that town one night....
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2019, 12:52:45 AM »
The big techs are going to have to decide if they are "platforms" or "publishers".

As a platform they have to allow pretty much any content (the usual 1A rules against calls to action, threats, and libel apply).  Then section 230 applies.

If they are picking and choosing who can be on their system, then they are publishers and do not have section 230 immunity.
Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants won't help.


Bring me my Broadsword and a clear understanding.
Get up to the roundhouse on the cliff-top standing.
Take women and children and bed them down.
Bless with a hard heart those that stand with me.
Bless the women and children who firm our hands.
Put our backs to the north wind.
Hold fast by the river.
Sweet memories to drive us on,
for the motherland.

brimic

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,270
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #2 on: June 20, 2019, 07:04:04 AM »
All I can say is  :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
"now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb" -Dark Helmet

"AK47's belong in the hands of soldiers mexican drug cartels"-
Barack Obama

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,738
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #3 on: June 20, 2019, 08:56:56 AM »
The big techs are going to have to decide if they are "platforms" or "publishers".


I thought I heard on the news the other day that one of the big ones (I forget which one) is seriously considering going "publisher".

I'm actually not sure how I feel about that, as they have gotten so large, that "publisher" for them is just a weasel way to be a platform where they get to push their agendas (via editing ideas they don't like) in a somewhat invisible way, that makes it look like their philosophy is actually a majority view in the US.

I'll say it again: These platforms, with Twitter being a prime example, started out with good intentions and as valuable services (like Twitter allowing information exchange during disasters, etc.). However, between their activist executives, and very often their commie activist employees and their demands, have become nothing but propaganda machines.
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #4 on: June 20, 2019, 10:07:13 AM »
I'm actually not sure how I feel about that, as they have gotten so large, that "publisher" for them is just a weasel way to be a platform where they get to push their agendas (via editing ideas they don't like) in a somewhat invisible way, that makes it look like their philosophy is actually a majority view in the US.
My understanding is that if they're a publisher then they're legally responsible for all content put on their site.

That's the last thing any big distributed content provider or social network wants, unless they're going to only allow vetted partners to post content ... which would be lethal.

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #5 on: June 20, 2019, 10:12:45 AM »
My understanding is that if they're a publisher then they're legally responsible for all content put on their site.

That's the last thing any big distributed content provider or social network wants, unless they're going to only allow vetted partners to post content ... which would be lethal.

Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a fatal mistake.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,738
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #6 on: June 20, 2019, 10:22:26 AM »
My understanding is that if they're a publisher then they're legally responsible for all content put on their site.

That's the last thing any big distributed content provider or social network wants, unless they're going to only allow vetted partners to post content ... which would be lethal.

Ah, maybe I misunderstood then. It was sounding to me  like it was a loophole for them to censor the people the views they don't like.
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

WLJ

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,841
  • On Patrol In The Epsilon Eridani System
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #7 on: June 20, 2019, 10:29:38 AM »
*
"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us".
- Calvin and Hobbes

Pb

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,887
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #8 on: June 20, 2019, 11:20:29 AM »
So, if they censor stuff on their site, they are liable for the content... and if they don't they aren't?  Seems reasonable... but I could be wrong. ???

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #9 on: June 20, 2019, 11:25:30 AM »
Right now they are claiming the same kind of protection that a phone company or internet provider has.  That is to say that they are not legally responsible for what happens on the platform because they don't choose what content goes through it.

If, on the other hand, they are a publisher they absolutely have the authority (and responsibility) to monitor and censor whatever goes out to the public.

What they want is the best of both worlds: to be able to choose to censor some things they don't like, while still claiming the same legal protections as non-censoring platforms claim so they don't have to vet every single thing that goes up.

This is giving rise to new platforms that promise to remain platforms that only censor based on content that violates US law.  ThinkSpot is one I'm keeping an eye on.

brimic

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,270
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #10 on: June 20, 2019, 11:28:05 AM »
Right now they are claiming the same kind of protection that a phone company or internet provider has.  



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System

"now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb" -Dark Helmet

"AK47's belong in the hands of soldiers mexican drug cartels"-
Barack Obama

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,619
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #11 on: June 20, 2019, 12:21:09 PM »
Right now they are claiming the same kind of protection that a phone company or internet provider has.  That is to say that they are not legally responsible for what happens on the platform because they don't choose what content goes through it.

If, on the other hand, they are a publisher they absolutely have the authority (and responsibility) to monitor and censor whatever goes out to the public.

What they want is the best of both worlds: to be able to choose to censor some things they don't like, while still claiming the same legal protections as non-censoring platforms claim so they don't have to vet every single thing that goes up.

This is giving rise to new platforms that promise to remain platforms that only censor based on content that violates US law.  ThinkSpot is one I'm keeping an eye on.
And from what I have heard, judges have been reluctant to make any sort of ruling to force them to be platform or publisher.  They are trying to be both.

Looking one of the links, there is a quote from the tech companies where they essentially say they don't want to give up censoring content. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,619
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #12 on: June 20, 2019, 12:28:43 PM »
Quote
The Internet Association, Silicon Valley's top tech trade group, in its own statement said Section 230 "is the law that allows online companies to moderate and remove content that no reasonable person wants online – including content that could have a 'political viewpoint.' "

"This bill forces platforms to make an impossible choice: either host reprehensible, but First Amendment protected speech, or lose legal protections that allow them to moderate illegal content like human trafficking and violent extremism," Internet Association president and CEO Michael Beckerman said in a statement. "That shouldn't be a tradeoff." 
The catch is the way they define "reprehensible, but First Amendment protected speech".  To them it is anything they disagree with plus scary guns.  Knowing what companies like Twitter and Youtube are doing, that quote is laughable. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,619
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #13 on: June 20, 2019, 12:34:07 PM »
That said, have any of you heard of anything in the bill we would not want? 

Personally, I have no problem with websites acting as platforms and getting some protection provided they are not censoring the content.  However, it appears there is little or no way to enforce that as they are finding all sorts of stealthy ways to censor content. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

brimic

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,270
Re: Sen Josh Hawley introduces bill to modify section 230
« Reply #14 on: June 20, 2019, 12:34:29 PM »
The catch is the way they define "reprehensible, but First Amendment protected speech".  To them it is anything they disagree with plus scary guns.  Knowing what companies like Twitter and Youtube are doing, that quote is laughable. 

Its always inferred that those doing wrongspeech are neo-nazi white separatist hatey-haters, therefore, it shouldn't be allowed or protected.

Weirdly, the left used to use the example of the ACLU as one time standing up for the KKK when defending the ACLU for defending very vile positions that the left loved.
"now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb" -Dark Helmet

"AK47's belong in the hands of soldiers mexican drug cartels"-
Barack Obama