Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More than a dozen Republican attorneys general have argued to the court that social media should be treated like traditional utilities such as the landline telephone network. The tech industry, meanwhile, argues that social media companies have First Amendment rights to make editorial decisions about what to show.

If social media companies are making editorial decisions then they're a publisher, not a platform.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Pretty much, I wish they get their protections removed at this point so whatever stray "illegal" posts are on the websites get them slammed.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The protections are necessary but it really needs to be an either or:

1. Register as a platform and stop fricking everyone over

1b. Dont get fricked for what r-slurs shitpost

2. Register as a publisher and curate posts all you want

2b. Get fricked for the shit you leave up, forfeiting protections afforded to platforms.

3. If a registered platform functions as a publisher, they lose protections and their ability to re-register as a platform + fined.

Its really this fricking simple.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

https://i.rdrama.net/images/17001184779706492.webp

iTODDLERS BTFO!

Snapshots:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseysal:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Clarence "Janny Exterminator" Thomas will be writing the majority opinion

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.