The Section gives them limited immunity from libel when something libelous is posted by a customer. Provided they are not in general curating what users write.
Repealing that section would not really have any effect here.
Has Charlie Kirk be libeled by Twitter? Probably not.
Yes, they could then end up being sued by a lot of people, and it could get expensive for them. But using the law is slow and nothing would happen right now.
Thanks for explanation. Agree that timing is too late now.
I just think that even though the courts are slow, getting that section changed by congress would be even slower.
They are violating the spirit and letter of that exemption. I’m not a lawyer, but seems pretty blatant.
They’re censoring news articles and opinions critical of social media and the communists, while not banning isis accounts used to recruit people.
The (not the correct enough term) favoritism should be enough to have 230 torn down with prejudice. They have clearly turned into a publisher, deciding what may and may not remain on their site.