
Senator Lieberman proposes to eliminate Section 230 immunity from blogs - andrewpi
http://mcintyre-v-ohio.com/2012/04/section-230-revision-will-likely-impact-anonymous-internet-speech/
======
reitzensteinm
When the constitution was framed, 'the press' meant literally anyone with a
printing press, which allowed them to mass produce their newspapers,
newsletters and zines.

Now, presses were expensive, so it's a matter for debate whether the founders
would have given the same right to everyone if presses were cheap like the
interenet is today. Remember that only landholders could vote - they made
distinctions based on wealth and status.

But it's not a matter for debate whether amateur press was intended to be
afforded protection. The press by and large _was_ amateur, and far closer to
the full time bloggers of today than it was to the New York Times.

If anything, the scrutiny of lawmakers should be on the press conglomerates
where so much power is in so few hands; but of course, that's not the way the
world works.

~~~
jules
I always find the american obsession with the constitution (& founding
fathers) a little weird. How about deciding what's best for now instead of
trying to interpret the words of a couple of guys 200 years ago as a gospel
about how the internet should work?

~~~
Turing_Machine
The Constitution is the supreme law of our land.

There's a clearly-defined process for changing it (it's been done 27 times, in
fact). "Deciding what's best for now" inevitably leads to abuses, or so many
of us see it (who gets to "decide" what's "best"?)

"Interpret the words of a couple of guys 200 years ago as a gospel about how
the internet should work?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

That still works for me. What problems do you see with it?

~~~
stephengillie
Who decides what religion is?

Who decides what speech is?

Who decides who the press are?

Who determines peaceful assembly vs riotous mob behavior?

Who determines the processes by which we can petition our government and the
process' effectiveness?

At best, these are all still grey areas we've been trying to nail down since
before these words were written.

------
robomartin
Not a lawyer. I have a question:

Joe tells me "Frank just killed three people and is a thief".

I go to a well attended town meeting and say "Joe told me that Frank just
killed three people and is a thief".

Am I liable for defamation of character if Joe did not tell me the truth?

Am I liable for any damages caused to Frank for this?

How is this different from a blog posting something that a third party said or
having its users post their own content?

~~~
vellum
IANAL but I think you would be liable. Newspapers get sued all the time for
printing things that aren't true. The reasoning is that you have conscious
control over what you say.

So in your example, a Tumblr blogger could get sued, but Tumblr would not be.
The provision in the Communications Decency Act was intended to shield
internet service providers like AOL. Before the Act passed, let's say AOL had
reviewers looking over comments and removing some of them. Someone could then
turn around and sue AOL by saying, "Hey look, your reviewers let this comment
stand and it's defamatory!" Whereas if AOL had taken a more hands off stance,
they might have have better off legally. Congress put in the provision to
encourage internet providers to police their content without fear of legal
repercussions. It's sort of like how Good Samaritan laws protect people who
try to help accident victims.

~~~
robomartin
You can get sued for anything. Whether or not the lawsuit has merit or not is
another matter. I think that's the key here. Would you be liable give my
hypothetical scenario?

------
bane
It would a special kind of fun if Lieberman participated in some sort of
online forum where comments were allowed, and somebody organized a protest of
sorts that flooded the comment system with things such that Lieberman was
himself now liable for those comments under his proposed change.

------
zzimbler
Can they ever really stop us? We'll use every possible measure aka toe to make
the Internet free. Just ask the guys at silk road

------
robomartin
If the lunatics are not running the asylum they sure are trying very, very
hard. And we keep letting them.

~~~
ktizo
Well, the asylum used to largely be a state run enterprise, but it was put on
the open market after some friends of the inmates pointed out how expensive
and badly run it was.

Then the inmates bought all the shares.

------
msie
Be careful what you say here. ;-)

------
docgnome
Erm... Is this real? It was posted on "don't believe anything on the internet"
day

------
Tangaroa
For all his years in the Senate, what an amateur he is. Let the terrorists
have their communications and get a warrant to force Twitter, Youtube, etc to
pipe all related activity to the FBI. Otherwise they'll go underground to
where the TLAs can no longer see them.

~~~
cageface
Count on Lieberman to be on the wrong side of every crucial issue. He's the
worst kind of Washington apparatchik tool.

~~~
AJ007
I'll probably get down voted for this, but in every sense the guy is a f _ing
a_ hole.

If he is not, his view of the world, and his decision process that brings him
to rationalize supporting some of our most destructive legislation is truly
disturbing.

~~~
axbx
I'm from the US. In my youth, I would discuss politics with just about anyone
under almost any circumstances. Tonight, I admit to having had a few drinks,
and understand this may be an admission of apathy to all the wrong internet
strangers...

However, I just want you as a PERSON to know that at least one other human out
in the void that is the United States agrees completely with you.

When I think of people like Joe Lieberman still having a job in 2012, and then
realize that he and others like him are continually _elected_ by people who
buy from me, work with me, and live with me because on some level they
want(??) people like this in office............

Words are incapable of describing my sadness, anger, and eventual apathy
towards the process.

------
Craiggybear
Who needs actual "enemies of the state" when you have Senators like Joe
Liberman?

