1st vs 1st.
There is no legal conflict between two parties using their freedom of speech. That’s not the issue.
The First Amendment applies to the government - and only the government.
1 Like
Keep following.
I assure you, I am.
Twitter is not capable of violating the First Amendment.
everything I said about it is right.
2 problems big tech will have vis a vie trump
- good faith. did they act in good faith?
- all falls under “otherwise objectionable” which any court I know of would find overly broad.
otherwise, as I said, publishers are not protected. If a court agrees they are acting as publishers, sec 230 does not protect them.
And answered by one.
Remember when conservatives were against frivolous lawsuits? Seems so long ago.
2 Likes
Trump sure as hell did. Cost people billions too every time he went after a corporation and their stock tumbled.
1 Like
Yeah, he said it was a necessary evil, necessary being the operative word.
No, it isn’t.
This isn’t true. There’s no part of Section 230 that doesn’t apply to “publishers”.
But the overarching point is that 230(c)(2) isn’t required for Trump to lose this suit. He loses anyway, even if it didn’t exist.
you really need to study harder
you can sue publishers
I suggest you read that again.
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider
This part of Section 230 makes it so message boards aren’t liable for defamation posted by users. It applies to all interactive computer services - and declares that they cannot be considered publishers.
You can sue anyone you want. The question is whether they have any legal liability.
1 Like
You didn’t read that, did you
i suggest you read it and this time understand it. they cannot be treated as publishers who can be sued.
no part of sec 230 applies to publishers.
the policy written into the law (above sec230) is that they are not to be treated as publishers (subject to law suits) because they are open platforms enhancing free flow of information, free markets, and user control of content. when they fail to act as open platforms and instead act in a capacity as a publisher sec 230 does not apply.
I assure you, I do understand it. I’ve been published on it, actually.
None of this is written into the law.
If it was, you’d be able to show me where.
Wow.
Anarchism.
2 Likes
Your government isn’t protecting citizens from bandits.
Well then let’s toss the whole thing.
Makes complete sense.
Nor is it juggling chain saws, or oil-painting.
