[ExI] Section 230 and Antitrust

[William Flynn Wallace]

Spike, I think 'endorse' is too strong a word.  It suggests that they
approve of it, as opposed to letting any side speak for itself.  Anyway,
dealing with endorsement is easy:  post disclaimers.   bill w

On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 1:24 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> *On Behalf
> Of *William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat
> *Sent:* Sunday, January 17, 2021 11:07 AM
> *To:* ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> *Cc:* William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Section 230 and Antitrust
>
>
>
> >…Wouldn't a completely unmoderated site feature content that is legally
> obscene, libelous or slanderous?   bill w
>
>
>
> Sure would.  The site would have to make it clear that it filters nothing,
> even illegal material, then rely on 230 for protection from liability for
> its content.
>
>
>
> As it is, the big sites to filter, and consequently I would argue even if
> they have legal immunity from liability, they carry a defacto endorsement
> of any material they left on their site.  Now Face Book and Twitter
> functionally endorse everything on there.
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20210117/f7657ec4/attachment-0001.htm>