I'm the one who actually submitted a article request for this.
Fans in the EU are also submitting GDPR requests to inconvenience blizzard.
That's not how the law works you moron, things are legal unless specifically made illegal.
Our version of football is MUCH older then you're version of football.
YOU'RE the one who stole OUR term, for a game that's not even played with your feet!
"Any student parade, serenade, demonstration, rally, and/or other meeting or gathering for any purpose "
So if I'm understanding this right, you need 3 days notice to do things like go on a date, return a borrowed item or help someone else study, WTF!
Without 230 they WOULDN'T be protected by a notice or takedown scheme.
And even if they were, they would make it EXTREMELY EASY to carry out censorship.
As determing whether something is defamatory is even harder then determing whether someone is copyright infringement any request to takedown ANY sought of negative comment would likely be carried out.
It is fully legal for a business to kick you off their premises for being an asshole.
Without Section 230, someone could use a Burner IP to post silly defamationary remarks about themselves and the sue the site for libel for a bit of cash.
It's just as plausible as anything that you have come up with.
This behavior isn't even unusual.
I myself, on multiple occasions have taken mult-year long breaks from a site before coming back.
Your scenario is FAR more likely to happen in a world without Section 230.
WIth Section 230, review sites can safely exist.
Without Section 230, review sites would be MUCH rarer due to liabilty issues.
I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but for quite some time know some random idiot has been coming in and keeps making random idiot comments about Section 230 and how it apparently causing vast numbers of people to have there reputations destroyed by random comments on the internet. Your bringing in of Section 230 on something unrelated made you like like him.
Copyright law just hates it when Mike Masnick is enforced.
You're an idiot who deons't understand how defamation laws work.
You can't sue for damages you inflict on yourself, not that you'd have any in this case.
A bunch of anonymous insults isn't going to silence a whistleblower.
Getting their content taken down and preventing anyone else from hosting it will.
Without section 230, silencing whistle blowers would be much easier.
And many of those websites will only allow comments for certain aritcles and disallow them for others. I've lost count of how many times I've seen "we are not accepting comments for legal reasons." on the Daily Mail for example. And the quantity of UGC on websites with comment sections is tiny compared to what you have on youtube, twitter, facebook, tumblr, reddit, deviantart, ETC.
I've never recieved them in the UK.
Unlike when I'm in Hong Kong when I get one every couple of days or so.
Techdirt WON the lawsuit Shiva filed. Because Techdirt was telling the truth.
And here everything Tehcdirt says is the truth.
Because if people realised that they were being trolled for obtaining a pirated version of the game then they would be encouraged to not pirate the next game.
The felony Murder rule is quite controversial ans there have been a number of highly controversial cases where it has been applied. Such as https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/26/felony-murder-teenager-55-years-jail-indiana
Re:
And yet there are STILL news websites who Geo-Block the EU because of the GDPR.