I was referred here, and I'm not wrong.
If you own a website, like Facebook or Reddit, and someone plans and executes a terror plot (or any other murder for that matter) you can make money off that content without liability.
That's wrong. That needs to change. Firstly, no one should be hosting that, and secondly they certainly shouldn't be profiting from that kind of content without liability.
I understand all the arguments for section 230, but it's a bad law. And bad arguments against it doesn't make it a good one.
I was referred here, and I'm not wrong.
If you own a website, like Facebook or Reddit, and someone plans and executes a terror plot (or any other murder for that matter) you can make money off that content without liability.
That's wrong. That needs to change. Firstly, no one should be hosting that, and secondly they certainly shouldn't be profiting from that kind of content without liability.
I understand all the arguments for section 230, but it's a bad law. And bad arguments against it doesn't make it a good one.
BestNetTech has not posted any stories submitted by charlie_jones.
I was referred here, and I'm not wrong. If you own a website, like Facebook or Reddit, and someone plans and executes a terror plot (or any other murder for that matter) you can make money off that content without liability. That's wrong. That needs to change. Firstly, no one should be hosting that, and secondly they certainly shouldn't be profiting from that kind of content without liability. I understand all the arguments for section 230, but it's a bad law. And bad arguments against it doesn't make it a good one.
I was referred here, and I'm not wrong. If you own a website, like Facebook or Reddit, and someone plans and executes a terror plot (or any other murder for that matter) you can make money off that content without liability. That's wrong. That needs to change. Firstly, no one should be hosting that, and secondly they certainly shouldn't be profiting from that kind of content without liability. I understand all the arguments for section 230, but it's a bad law. And bad arguments against it doesn't make it a good one.