Section 230
“Inevitably, when millions of people are speaking, some of that speech will be objectionable.”
Broad Section 230 immunity is under siege, but it’s useful to remember that this statute has been very helpful to have around:
Broad Section 230(c) immunity fosters freedom of speech and the development of the Internet. Without broad immunity, interactive computer services would lack the freedom to structure their websites in any way they want and to solicit and encourage user-generated content. They would run a high risk of being treated as publishers of objectionable third-party content and face liability for it. Broad immunity has allowed the flexibility for the eBays, Amazons, MySpaces, and blogs of the world to create unique sites that encourage the sharing and development of content, information, and speech by their users.
(From a recent CDT/EFF amicus brief.)
This statute might have application to the net neutrality battle as well - after all, it mandates that internet access providers (”interactive computer service” - defined to include any system that provides access to the internet) not be treated as “the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” So the netops can’t claim to be “speakers” of internet communications. Congress has made clear that they aren’t.
Comments
One Response to “Section 230”
Got something to say?
The full text of the pertinent Section 230 sestion appears below. It seems quite clearly limited only to protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material, and who will be treated as a speaker for liability purposes. It does not come close to delimiting other rights, such as those under the First Amendment, and to say that it has bearing on the net neutrality debate is quite a stretch, I think since Congress did not remotely consider that issue in passing the statute.
“Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
(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.
(2) Civil liability
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).[1] “