Reply to post: Re: The law of Unintended Consequences applies....

Section 230 supporters turn on it, its critics rely on it. Up is down, black is white in the crazy world of US law

ThatOne Silver badge

Re: The law of Unintended Consequences applies....

> Probably, the best way to modify Section 230 is to separate the former system from the latter.

I'm afraid it's not as easy as that. Think about it from the "what's the problem" point of view, after all email and phone carriers are accused of not doing enough against spam (or cold callers) too. Does this mean they should be liable for the content of the emails/calls they transport? Well, obviously nobody would like somebody else listening in on his calls/emails, but nobody likes finding heaps of spam in his Inbox either.

My point is, it's not a "platform" as much as an "abuse" issue. You can abuse any type of platform, obviously some easier than others, and some are made to be abused, but the task at hand is to prevent abuse, or at least make it very complicated and/or too expensive. The solutions to that are different and platform-dependent, what works for a call or email platform won't work for Facebook for instance. But one thing is clear, there is no convenient one-size-fits-all solution.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020