Thread by @cagoldberglaw

CDA folks: CDA230 is so sexy. It empowers platforms to remove harmful content w/o fear of being sued

Tort lawyers: k. great job with that content moderation. Now, uh what cause of action could be used for removing content if not for 230?

CDA folks: shuttup. 10,000 duck bites

In the public morning session, CDA folks saying plaintiffs are so annoying and plentiful, suing would kill these poor companies with litigation costs.

Behind closed doors in the afternoon, CDA folks saying actual injuries from these platforms are so rare as to just be anecdotes

And they say of course given the scale of these companies, mistakes happen but a few injuries, live-streamed mass shootings , etc doesn’t mean these companies should be liable.

Just like how we don’t need rights if we get in a car crash b/c the majority of the time traffic flows

And if somebody smashes your kid in the mouth with a hammer, you shouldn’t be able to get justice, b/c it’s not like that person is always smashing people with hammers.

And so what if a few planes crash for foreseeable negligent reasons when most planes land safely.

This conversation about tech being held liable can not just look at what will and won’t deter tech. It needs to look at making INDIVIDUAL human beings whole who’ve been injured.

Why aren’t more tort lawyers going berserk with me and @annietmcadams ???

When two Boeings crashed, they grounded the whole fucking fleet.

Meanwhile last year, 45 MILLION images of children being sexually abused were reported. And that’s just the few companies that voluntarily report it.

This fleet needs to be grounded