Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Olog-hai
No, it is because I actually read it. Section 230 is written in very plain english that should be easily understood (I hope for you).

(1)Treatment of publisher or speaker
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Get it now? Section 230 means Free Republic isn't the publisher of my comments, and isn't liable for them. NY Times is the publisher of their articles and can be held liable.

AWS/Parler relationship isn't publisher/content provider and there is nothing in Section 230 that applies to their relationship.

33 posted on 02/06/2021 3:22:42 PM PST by Wayne07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: Wayne07

And if it were repealed, which Trump has called for, it does not mean that platforms automatically get treated as publishers either because the First Amendment has not been repealed. And Parler was treated as a publisher per AWS claims in spite of it.

Proof by assertion is a logical fallacy, as is argumentum ad lapidem (ignoring what I’m pointing out).


34 posted on 02/06/2021 3:28:34 PM PST by Olog-hai ("No Republican, no matter how liberal, is going to woo a Democratic vote." -- Ronald Reagan, 1960)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson