by Mike Masnick
Mon, Jan 18th 2010 8:01pm
We've spent plenty of time discussing the importance of Section 230 in properly applying liability, and avoiding situations where angry individuals or organizations sue a third party service provider because they have deeper pockets and are easier to sue. However, most countries don't have similar safe harbors (or, if they do, they tend to be much more limited). This is really unfortunate and can lead to significant chilling effects. Over in the UK, it looks like they've just updated e-commerce regulations to carve out a safe harbor for ISPs... but only related to hate speech. But it makes me wonder why carve out a special exemption for hate speech, and why not set up full safe harbors that say a service provider should not be blamed for the actions of a user?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Zuckerberg Momentarily Curbs 'Hate Speech' Moderation Stupidity At Facebook To Reinstate Posts By Donald Trump
- UK Tribunal Says Spy Agencies Illegally Collected Communications Data In Bulk For More Than A Decade
- 'When Is A Chair Just A Chair?' And Other Annoying Copyright Questions
- UK Government Says Smart Meters Can Definitely Be Trusted Because GCHQ Designed Their Security
- Former UMG Exec: Major Label Music Should Cost More And DMCA Safe Harbors Should Be Destroyed