Conversation

Notices

1. just an actual husbear (guizzy@pleroma.guizzyordi.info)'s status on Tuesday, 05-Apr-2022 23:01:23 EDT just an actual husbear
   @roboneko @dave @Hyolobrika @Moon In the US (which, let's be honest, is the only jurisdiction that matters in this case), these private public squares enjoy exemptions from liability for user-generated posts that were given to them because it was deemed that making them liable for these posts would have a chilling effect on the growth of the Internet as these service providers would have to enact draconian methods to avoid lawsuits (having to manually approve every post, for instance) or just give up entirely.
   
   Now that it's made apparent that these companies have the means of curating speech and are perfectly fine with using them (in controversial ways, not just removing CP or snuff content), then I think it's clear they could also use these methods to remove speech that would expose them to lawsuits. It would follow that with all those tools at their disposal; speech that DOES remain on these platforms is tacitly endorsed by these companies. The laws should be updated so that applying non-neutral curation tools and methods exposes them to liability.
   1. just an actual husbear (guizzy@pleroma.guizzyordi.info)'s status on Tuesday, 05-Apr-2022 23:05:09 EDT just an actual husbear

      in reply to
      @roboneko @Hyolobrika @Moon @dave Or more succintly; you can't go "Noooo, government, you can't force us to control what people say on our platforms, that would force us to restrict their speech!"
      
      And then turn around and go "FUCK your free speech, I'm a private company, not the government"