230 should be reformed but by removing the part that encourages censorship not the protections for users.
bookmark
Bump.
Justice Thomas may have put a “shot across the bow” of some Internet companies, and with the addition of Justice Amy Barrett, may be looking for just the right case...
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/101320zor_8m58.pdf
“Statement of THOMAS, J. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
MALWAREBYTES, INC. v. ENIGMA SOFTWARE GROUP USA, LLC
...
The decision is one of the few where courts have relied on purpose and policy to deny immunity under §230. But the court’s decision to stress purpose and policy is familiar.Courts have long emphasized nontextual arguments when interpreting §230, leaving questionable precedent in their wake.
I agree with the Court’s decision not to take up this case.I write to explain why, in an appropriate case, we should consider whether the text of this increasingly important statute aligns with the current state of immunity enjoyed by Internet platforms”