Why Section 230 Is a Good Law and Why Messing with It Would Be Bad

I think that censorship should be expressly limited based on size and usage of 230 protections. ex: if you have 10+ million users and you want to cite section 230 protections, you may not censor protected speech, but maybe allow users to opt-in to a "censored" feed, or otherwise limited such as for minors.

I'm mixed, but I don't think companies should have 230 protection AND be able to make express publisher decisions on editorializing content.

(Reminder that TechDirt is also a lobbyist Copia Insitute who takes money from big tech clients.)

Section 230 is a terrible law because it exempts one class of business from any responsibility for their actions.

A global company which faces no penalties for allowing malicious and fraudulent content has no incentive to police itself, and its clients live outside the reach of the law. Ergo, they make money on crime and have no responsibility for it.

If we want to fix the Internet, step one is deleting 230 in its entirety, and step two is ensuring a tech platform cannot profit from illegal activity. That means if they sell a malicious ad, they at bare minimum, have to give up that revenue, and ideally, face a penalty for it if they aren't taking adequate measures to prevent abuse.

A true financial risk to tech platforms is the only way to incentivize good behavior.