You must understand that these are just feelings you have, right?
The lawsuit will fail, no matter how much you want it to succeed - because it’s not supported by law.
1 Like
Jezcoe
163
It won’t.
And don’t get me wrong… I think that Facebook should be ground into glass and be fired into the sun… but that has more to do with helping to foment a genocide and not the imaginary grievance for fun and profit.
Yep and if you look at the top most trafficked political pages, almost the entire top 10 is conservative/republicans
1 Like
Do it anyway. Then do something else.
The only part of Section 230 that actually matters is (c)(1).
Twitter isn’t legally liable for banning Trump, even if (c)(2) was repealled today.
i understand it fine. does it cover publishers?
No, I don’t think you do. I’ll demonstrate:
Define “publisher.”
No, it doesn’t.
Even without 230(c)(2), Twitter isn’t liable for banning anyone.
answer the question, does it cover publishers?
its a simple question with a yes or no answer
No, it isn’t. It’s a not even wrong question.
The fact that you’re asking it shows that you don’t understand what the terms mean.
1 Like
no, it just shows you’re too stubborn to answer.
does sec 230 protect publishers?
1 Like
Your question is nonsense.
It is like asking if the First Amendment applies to bicycles.
1 Like
again, plain and simple. the law states that isp are not to be treated as publishers.
does sec 230 protect publishers?
It protects “information service providers” which is what Twitter and Facebook are
Section 230 protects internet service provides by preventing them from being considered publishers.
I understand that you’re not quite grasping the concept, but I don’t know how to explain it any simpler.
1 Like
Jezcoe
179
Government is an inevitability.
okay, now we’re getting somewhere
but the law does not say “considered” the language is specific. “shall not be treated as the publisher”
now, what if they are acting as a publisher and deciding what to publish?
it offers them protection from liability for restricting access to or availability of material… when?
As far as I’m using the terms, “considered” and “treated” are synonymous.
Nothing happens. They still can’t be treated as publishers.
All the time. But again - they don’t have any liability to begin with.
At the root of civil liability is a very basic matrix- there must be a legal duty, that duty must have been breached, and that breach must have caused damages.
Twitter does not owe a duty to not ban its members. The analysis stops right there.
3 Likes
