Battle for Section 230 - The Situation Monitoring Thread for Monitoring the Situation of the Situation Monitor's Situation Monitoring

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
GedsForth said:
Nunes' case was the most retarded LOLsuit you could possibly bring against twitter. Even without Section 230, this was a clean cut 1A case.
Click to expand...

It was a classic SLAPP. He quite clearly was just attempting to silence his critics. People were literally just making jokes about him, mocking him, and insulting him, which every politician alive deserves. If you don't want to be shit on, like the piece of shit you are, don't be a politician.

I also kind of love the "fuck you I'm not even going to dismiss your case in an actual opinion" thing. He just sent a letter with none of the fancy formatting.

For extra fuck you points, he should have dismissed the case in a series of tweets.
 
Not only is section 230 under attack, but there's a strong push to greatly weaken encryption
EARN IT act and the Lawful Access to Encrypted Data Act are a direct attack against internet privacy, freedom and enables law enforcement agencies to spy on their citizens. There's also the very real risk of foreign intelligence agents/hackers exploiting the 'back door' feature to gain access to top secret encrypted data.
Anyone who supports these acts are either partisan hacks, boomers, boot lickers or re.tards
 
Coleslaw said:
If not for 230 would Scott v. Moon have gone the other way?
Click to expand...

No. That wasn't thrown out because of 230. It was thrown out because it was unintelligible gibberish that so completely failed to state a claim the judge threw it out without the other side even having to respond. That's almost unheard-of.
 
Is it just me or are those tech companies just asking for the repeal of section 230? Trump Derangement Syndrom seems to be really strong

 
Balr0g said:
Is it just me or are those tech companies just asking for the repeal of section 230? Trump Derangement Syndrom seems to be really strong

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ikgN5GrHFBQ
Click to expand...
All the while Reddit is making rules that makes it okay to hate the 'majority' (which they never specified what they meant, but you know it's white people)

As sad as it will be seeing websites like this go, I'm honestly beginning to believe that repealing 230 will be better for society, at least for a bit.
 
Observotron said:
All the while Reddit is making rules that makes it okay to hate the 'majority' (which they never specified what they meant, but you know it's white people)

As sad as it will be seeing websites like this go, I'm honestly beginning to believe that repealing 230 will be better for society, at least for a bit.
Click to expand...
Not to mention as Tim said himself hating a majority seems to be ok for those companies. Women make up the majority in the US (in my former home country it is the same) So we can be all mysoginistic as we like because it's ok to hate the majority. Fuck this shit. I really think the Internet needs to be destroyed and then rebuild
 
Last edited:
You're fucking delusional if you think Twitter, Facebook, et al will go down with everyone else if 230 is removed.

They'll suck off whoever they need to or fork over as much money in fines as it takes. It will leave only the mainstream sites doing this shit alive as survivors in a smoldering crater everyone used to call "the internet".

Which is why you have Joe Biden, aside from being deranged, agreeing with the notion of removing it.
 
Unog said:
You're fucking delusional if you think Twitter, Facebook, et al will go down with everyone else if 230 is removed.
Click to expand...

Onerous regulations always favor the monopolists because only they can afford the money/bribes/etc. both to write themselves loopholes in the law as well as lawyers to make whatever they do "legal" no matter how flagrantly they actually violate the law. Section 230 protects us and other "little guys" who otherwise have little to protect us.

Section 230 is deregulation in its purest form and not only eliminated all legislative, executive and even court-created regulation against ISPs and websites and even to some extent normal Internet users, but banned any future such regulation. Removing this one little bit of law essentially puts all that back on the table and throws everyone into regulatory chaos where until a bunch of people go broke litigating it, we don't even know what the law is.
 
AnOminous said:
Onerous regulations always favor the monopolists because only they can afford the money/bribes/etc. both to write themselves loopholes in the law as well as lawyers to make whatever they do "legal" no matter how flagrantly they actually violate the law. Section 230 protects us and other "little guys" who otherwise have little to protect us.

Section 230 is deregulation in its purest form and not only eliminated all legislative, executive and even court-created regulation against ISPs and websites and even to some extent normal Internet users, but banned any future such regulation. Removing this one little bit of law essentially puts all that back on the table and throws everyone into regulatory chaos where until a bunch of people go broke litigating it, we don't even know what the law is.
Click to expand...

Could they, theoretically speaking, remove a single company's protection if they are American based but violate basic rights like reddit is doing?
 
Shield Breaker said:
Could they, theoretically speaking, remove a single company's protection if they are American based but violate basic rights like reddit is doing?
Click to expand...

You can't pass a law that specifically says "Bob is guilty." That's a writ of attainder.

Section 230 doesn't stop you from suing reddit if they violate your rights directly. The problem is what value is a reddit account? Maybe you get a nominal value like a dollar out of it. Unless you also get attorney's fees it isn't going to be worth it.
 
AnOminous said:
You can't pass a law that specifically says "Bob is guilty." That's a writ of attainder.

Section 230 doesn't stop you from suing reddit if they violate your rights directly. The problem is what value is a reddit account? Maybe you get a nominal value like a dollar out of it. Unless you also get attorney's fees it isn't going to be worth it.
Click to expand...

I mean like them saying that majority groups don't have the same rights. It just doesn't seem right to me that I could harass or mock you for being white, but if you did the same to me based on my race you would break the rules. This is giving favorable treatment to some American customers based on race, sexuality, etc.
 
Shield Breaker said:
This is giving favorable treatment to some American customers based on race, sexuality, etc.
Click to expand...

It's obviously illegal but you need someone to sue and you need enough damages to hurt them. Once you have the first you can bring a thousand more. Good luck with that first one, though.
 
www.whitehouse.gov

Statement from the Press Secretary Regarding the Implementation of President Trump’s Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship | The White House

On Monday, the Department of Commerce, as directed by President Donald J. Trump’s Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship, filed a petition to clar
www.whitehouse.gov www.whitehouse.gov
archive.is

Statement from the Press Secretary Regarding the Implementation of Pr…

archived 30 Jul 2020 01:01:25 UTC
archive.is archive.is
On Monday, the Department of Commerce, as directed by President Donald J. Trump’s Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship, filed a petition to clarify the scope of Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. The petition requests that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) clarify that Section 230 does not permit social media companies that alter or editorialize users’ speech to escape civil liability. The petition also requests that the FCC clarify when an online platform curates content in “good faith,” and requests transparency requirements on their moderation practices, similar to requirements imposed on broadband service providers under Title I of the Communications Act. President Trump will continue to fight back against unfair, un-American, and politically biased censorship of Americans online.
 
Last edited:
Russell Greer is going to kill 230 before Trump can.
https://kiwifarms.net/threads/russe...taofrussellgreer.30488/page-2203#post-7003143
screenshot_20200727-221028_facebook-jpg.1478996


Not filed yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom