U.S. Senators propose limiting liability shield for social media platforms

Revisions to section 230 have been proposed by Democrat senators that is supposed to 'limit the liability shield' of social media companies for ads and other paid content on their platforms. Probably a good thing....

But....

It also adds another section, changing the word 'information' to 'speech'. This section is the one people worried about online free speech should be worried about. This section now leaves the law vague enough that platform owners in general are now responsible for anything that is not technically 'speech' while not actually defining what is and isn't speech. This leaves a lot of room for interpretation and essentially leaves it up to a judge.

It seems like an innocuous change, but it means someone now gets to decide whether something a user posts is speech or not and if not, the platform owner becomes responsible for the content.

www.reuters.com...

www.protocol.com...

Three top Democratic senators added to the stack of proposed Section 230 reforms Friday, introducing their own bill that creates narrow carve-outs for a range of online harms, dramatically limits the scope of behaviors that Section 230 covers and takes aim at illicit activity that online platforms directly profit from.

The so-called SAFE TECH Act was introduced Friday by Sens. Mark Warner, Mazie Hirono and Amy Klobuchar. Under the bill, online platforms would not be able to claim Section 230 immunity for alleged violations of federal or state civil rights laws, antitrust laws, cyberstalking laws, human rights laws or civil actions regarding a wrongful death. The law would strip companies of immunity for any speech they were paid to carry, such as ads or marketplace listings, and it would make clear that Section 230 does not shield companies from complying with court orders.

In addition to the specific carve-outs it includes, the SAFE TECH Act attempts to limit Section 230 more broadly, so that it would be applied only to actual speech, not all bad behavior online: for example, illegal gun sales. To achieve this, the bill makes a subtle but meaningful tweak to the part of the law that's often referred to as the "26 words that created the internet."

Under the SAFE TECH Act, the word "information" would be swapped out for the word "speech," narrowing the law and potentially erasing liability protections for a range of other illicit information-sharing that happens on online platforms.

They already censored people with opinions like mine so I guess it’s the other sides turn to be censored. I think I’ll cheer it along while the other side gets censored now.

a reply to: dug88

It's good to see Democrat Senators proposing adjustments to Section 230. Republicans were already on board with getting something done.

a reply to: carewemust

Heck yeah, they need to really crack down on sites like Facebook.
You know, the one they started. Potentially every single sm site as well.

I'd keep an eye on this one.
The internet is a huge roadblock to making sure everyone is disinformed.
Just need enough damage to get the public to agree with censorship.

Standard rule of thumb: If the democrats want it, there will be a hook inside that bait. IMHO.