Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Section 230 is about who's liable if speech either breaks the law or causes damages in some way unprotected by the First Amendment. That's the table-stakes of the discussion. It's a little silly to bring up the First Amendment given that context.


You have it backwards.

230 is about who is NOT liable. Platforms are NOT liable for what they don't moderate, just because they moderated other things. It protects them from imperfect moderation being used to claim endorsement.


Surely they're one and the same. By explicitly stating that someone is not liable, you're indirectly defining more the set of people who are liable.


How could you break the law by merely reordering the content a user will see?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: