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...
- 20 Years Ago Today: The Most Important Law On The Internet Was Signed, Almost By Accident
- UK Investigative Agencies Want To Be Able To Send Warrants To US Companies
- UK Police Deny Misspelling Led To Investigation, Say It Was Other Schoolwork Instead
- How The UK's Counter-Terrorism And Security Act Has Made Law Enforcement Into The Literal Grammar Police
- What's The Difference Between 'Mass Surveillance' And 'Bulk Collection'? Does It Matter?