Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA230), specifically section 230(c) which reads:
(c)Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
(1)Treatment of publisher or speaker
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
(2)Civil liability
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
(B)any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1)
is the reason we have user shared content on millions of sites around the Internet. It is what protects the comment sections of our site and all others on the Internet.
Efforts to tamper with Section 230 have made people worse off and harmed our 1st Amendment rights. With FOSTA and SESTA, Congress excluded consensual sex work from Section 230 protections. The resulting law has made consensual sex work more difficult and more dangerous for sex workers while not stopping sex-focused human trafficking.
The Massachusetts Pirate Party categorically opposes efforts to exclude any human activity from Section 230 protections or to limit or expire Section 230 protections in whole or in part.
0 comments on “We oppose efforts to change Section 230 protections”