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...
- Head Of UK Parliamentary Committee Overseeing Intelligence Agencies Resigns After Being Caught In Sting
- Humiliating Admission By UK Government That Yet More Of Its Surveillance Was Unlawful
- UK Intellectual Property Office Plays Up Imaginary 'Toxic' Claim In Grabbing Food Pretending To Be From Somewhere Else
- UK Police Forces Have Secret Facial Recognition Database Of 18 Million People, Many Innocent
- GCHQ Will Have To Start Letting Everyone Know Whether Or Not They've Been Illegally Spied On