Ken "Popehat" White wrote this last October. According to him, the disinformation surrounding §230 are lies and propaganda that even pale by comparison the misinformation over RICO (which, from Ken White, is astounding to hear).
Just listened to the podcast and Ron Wyden (accidentally) makes a factual error: he presumed that the CDA was pushed by a Senator from South Dakota when it was a Senator from Nebraska: James Exon.
I spend all this time, writing a thorough-googled, well-researched reply, and here comes Stephen T. Stone, doing a damn far better job articulating a response than I ever did.
And is great for sites unlike facebook, twitter and reddit that don't abuse it.
Um, Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit were using §230 as it was intended. Cox and Wyden made that clear over and over and over again.
Either you're responsible for all of the content or none of it.
Which will be the case if §230 goes away
This nonsense of censoring users and not being responsible at the same time is both an abuse of section 230 and a flagrant circumvention of the first amendment by Democrat dominated companies.
Second of all, as I said, Cox and Wyden explicitly say that §230 is being used as intended.
Third of all, maybe you should look up what compelled speech is and that §230 is the only part of the CDA to survive Reno v. ACLU before you say that it violates the first amendment.
Just look at their employee donations on opensecrets.org. Every single one of them, their employees and excecs donate 90%+ to Democrats and Democrat run PACs.
Let's see some Democrats that Mark Zuckerberg gave to:
Marco Rubio, Orrin Hatch, Paul Ryan. Yup, big group o' donkeys they are! (In fairness, he does give to Dems like Majority Leader Schumer and Katie Porter, but it's false that he only gives 10% to GOP members).
But what about Jack Dorsey? …Okay, that's a fair point, he's given entirely to Dems.
As for Steve Huffman, some disambiguation is needed, so I'll assume it's the one in San Jose. Also a fair point.
They should be forced to carry a (D-CA) designation just like the news likes to brand congress with to avoid any nasty critical thinking.
which is also how Fox News brands a Republican from California who is losing a statewide election.
Techdirt and their increasing on sided [sic] authoritarianism
Nice to know that believing in property rights and the first amendment not compelling speech is authoritarian and not a conservative virtue.
It used to be a company that revealed the dirt in tech.
Still does. But names are skin deep. Unless you're one of those people who actually thinks Fox News does vulpine updates.
Now they're just concealing it if it's done for the Left reasons.
I just want to make a comment speaking as my status as a Techdirt Insider:
I have seen this very article for the longest time in limbo as an upcoming article in the "Crystal Ball", and I am just so happy that I can read this article as it ripened into fruition (although the ripening period was looooooooooong). I'm just saddened it took so consarn long!
👀👀 Uh-oh, did my performing rights organization do anything wrong? 👀👀
*goes on to read post*
Oh, phew! They didn't screw up and act maximalist like ASCAP. I'm glad I signed on with them! I guess all of you see why as well; I see them as the lesser of two (now three, if you include SESAC) evils.
The problem with sortition is that governing would be seen as an annoyance. I mean, would you trust nuclear weapons to somebody who sees leading a nation as annoying as jury duty?
Section 230 was written by Ron Wyden, a Democrat (who is now a Senator), and Chris Cox, a Republican (who went on to be SEC Chairman in W’s second term). Also, Section 230 passed the house virtually unanimously with only four votes against it (even Lindsey Graham voted for it).
Solely blaming Dems for Section 230 is more ludicrous than the fastest speed in Spaceballs.
I found out one of my old high school teachers who I admired was now living in Canada, and wrote an interesting book. However, I asked if there would be a DRM-free version of the book, and someone who was either his agent or publisher said that no, the book will have DRM on it and there would not be a DRM-free version of it.
That was the end of it. You could be an old friend of mine who wrote something cool and I still wouldn't read it if it had DRM on it.
While he kept inviting me to his e-launch-party and I kept declining because I clearly didn't want to read his e-tome because the fact it had DRM on it meant that I couldn't put a similar copy on my Barnes & Noble Nook in addition to my iPhone (among many, many other reasons).
Meanwhile, my friend and partner-in-music Raheem "Mega Ran" Jarbo released a quasi-self-published book (rather, he got a publisher that did all the duties publishers do but none of the gatekeeping) and it included a DRM-free PDF of the book, if not an EPUB or MOBI/AZW of the book. Since it was technically DRM-free, I've been reading it, and I've been enjoying it!
It just shows you that the key to my heart is to release something without Digital Rights Management; it shows that the author actually respects their customers!
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 272: Section 230 Matters, With Ron Wyden & Chris Cox
Re:
Ken "Popehat" White wrote this last October. According to him, the disinformation surrounding §230 are lies and propaganda that even pale by comparison the misinformation over RICO (which, from Ken White, is astounding to hear).
On the post: New York City Shifting Mental Health Calls From NYPD To Actual Mental Health Professionals
Wha?
DeBlasio doing something good vis-à-vis police?
Impressive! I'll be damned!
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 272: Section 230 Matters, With Ron Wyden & Chris Cox
Re: Re: Erratum
That last comment was from me. I was accidentally signed out. Son of Derp.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 272: Section 230 Matters, With Ron Wyden & Chris Cox
Erratum
Just listened to the podcast and Ron Wyden (accidentally) makes a factual error: he presumed that the CDA was pushed by a Senator from South Dakota when it was a Senator from Nebraska: James Exon.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 272: Section 230 Matters, With Ron Wyden & Chris Cox
GODDAMMIT! (admiringly)
I spend all this time, writing a thorough-googled, well-researched reply, and here comes Stephen T. Stone, doing a damn far better job articulating a response than I ever did.
If you think I'm just jealous, well, yeah, I am.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 272: Section 230 Matters, With Ron Wyden & Chris Cox
Re: 230 matters
Um, Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit were using §230 as it was intended. Cox and Wyden made that clear over and over and over again.
Which will be the case if §230 goes away
First of all, you're confusing Moderation with Censorship.
Second of all, as I said, Cox and Wyden explicitly say that §230 is being used as intended.
Third of all, maybe you should look up what compelled speech is and that §230 is the only part of the CDA to survive Reno v. ACLU before you say that it violates the first amendment.
Let's see some Democrats that Mark Zuckerberg gave to:
Marco Rubio, Orrin Hatch, Paul Ryan. Yup, big group o' donkeys they are! (In fairness, he does give to Dems like Majority Leader Schumer and Katie Porter, but it's false that he only gives 10% to GOP members).
But what about Jack Dorsey? …Okay, that's a fair point, he's given entirely to Dems.
As for Steve Huffman, some disambiguation is needed, so I'll assume it's the one in San Jose. Also a fair point.
which is also how Fox News brands a Republican from California who is losing a statewide election.
Nice to know that believing in property rights and the first amendment not compelling speech is authoritarian and not a conservative virtue.
Still does. But names are skin deep. Unless you're one of those people who actually thinks Fox News does vulpine updates.
O RLY?
On the post: The Unasked Question In Tech Policy: Where Do We Get The Lawyers?
Finally! (as a Techdirt insider)
I just want to make a comment speaking as my status as a Techdirt Insider:
I have seen this very article for the longest time in limbo as an upcoming article in the "Crystal Ball", and I am just so happy that I can read this article as it ripened into fruition (although the ripening period was looooooooooong). I'm just saddened it took so consarn long!
On the post: State Court Says Tennessee's Anti-SLAPP Law Is Constitutional, Shuts Down Litigant Involved In Baseless Libel Litigation
You know what they say…
"Is this state law from Tennessee? Because it's the only state law that's a Ten-I-See"
Hyuk hyuk hyuk.
On the post: Taylor Swift, Evermore Theme Park Dispute Escalates As Swift's Team Countersues
BMI
*sees BMI in the post*
👀👀 Uh-oh, did my performing rights organization do anything wrong? 👀👀
*goes on to read post*
Oh, phew! They didn't screw up and act maximalist like ASCAP. I'm glad I signed on with them! I guess all of you see why as well; I see them as the lesser of two (now three, if you include SESAC) evils.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: The career politician
The problem with sortition is that governing would be seen as an annoyance. I mean, would you trust nuclear weapons to somebody who sees leading a nation as annoying as jury duty?
On the post: Federal Court Says There's Nothing Wrong With Arresting Someone For Parodying A Police Department Facebook Page
Re:
Is now not a good time to hock my album with the same name?
On the post: AT&T Appears Committed To Being Comically Hypocritical On Section 230
Re:
Section 230 was written by Ron Wyden, a Democrat (who is now a Senator), and Chris Cox, a Republican (who went on to be SEC Chairman in W’s second term). Also, Section 230 passed the house virtually unanimously with only four votes against it (even Lindsey Graham voted for it).
Solely blaming Dems for Section 230 is more ludicrous than the fastest speed in Spaceballs.
On the post: Illinois Lawmaker Proposes Unconstitutional Ban Of 'GTA' In Response To Carjackings
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Is there an purpose for that porpoise?
On the post: Illinois Lawmaker Proposes Unconstitutional Ban Of 'GTA' In Response To Carjackings
Re:
Except Dolphins, Whales, and Fish, for that matter.
On the post: Content Moderation At Scale Is Impossible: Recent Examples Of Misunderstanding Context
Re: Loosen Up A Little
Koby making sense?
What is the world coming to?!?!?!
On the post: DRM Screws People Yet Again: Book DRM Data Breach Exposes Reporters' Emails And Passwords
Raheem Jarbo's book
BTW, Raheem Jarbo's book is called Dream Master.
On the post: DRM Screws People Yet Again: Book DRM Data Breach Exposes Reporters' Emails And Passwords
This is why I've gone cold turkey on eBook DRM.
I have a story to tell…
I found out one of my old high school teachers who I admired was now living in Canada, and wrote an interesting book. However, I asked if there would be a DRM-free version of the book, and someone who was either his agent or publisher said that no, the book will have DRM on it and there would not be a DRM-free version of it.
That was the end of it. You could be an old friend of mine who wrote something cool and I still wouldn't read it if it had DRM on it.
While he kept inviting me to his e-launch-party and I kept declining because I clearly didn't want to read his e-tome because the fact it had DRM on it meant that I couldn't put a similar copy on my Barnes & Noble Nook in addition to my iPhone (among many, many other reasons).
Meanwhile, my friend and partner-in-music Raheem "Mega Ran" Jarbo released a quasi-self-published book (rather, he got a publisher that did all the duties publishers do but none of the gatekeeping) and it included a DRM-free PDF of the book, if not an EPUB or MOBI/AZW of the book. Since it was technically DRM-free, I've been reading it, and I've been enjoying it!
It just shows you that the key to my heart is to release something without Digital Rights Management; it shows that the author actually respects their customers!
On the post: Karma: Twitch Replaces Live Metallica Concert With 8-Bit Music To Avoid Copyright Madness
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's called Toys In Space.
Also, I think I made a MOD track…
On the post: Karma: Twitch Replaces Live Metallica Concert With 8-Bit Music To Avoid Copyright Madness
Re: Re: Re: It's called Toys In Space.
Just the Game Boy's 2xPulse, 1xWav, and 1xNoise; the YM2612; the NES' 2a03+VRC6 expansion chipset; and the Super NES's S-SMP.
On the post: Karma: Twitch Replaces Live Metallica Concert With 8-Bit Music To Avoid Copyright Madness
Re: Re: Re: Re: Karma's a Twitch
Dammit, there goes my plan to track "Rhapsody in Blue" on the NES using the VRC6 expansion chip for three extra sound channels!
Next >>