Section 230 hinges on "information provided by another information content provider"
It's time to recognize that Twitter stopped providing individual tweets long time ago, and is only providing access to a tweet database that they designed, created and actively maintain /1
It's time to recognize that Twitter stopped providing individual tweets long time ago, and is only providing access to a tweet database that they designed, created and actively maintain /1
i.e., Twitter is providing access to their own work of art (the database of tweets) rather than to individual works of art of third party (twitter users). In which case Section 230 (c) protection don't apply anymore./2
It's time to create a new, specific legal category of database of social media posts; designed, created, and actively curated by a social media site. /3
This distinction will allow neat delineation of responsibility between singular posts (the OP) vs the totality of the database (the platform). /4
It also allows for the Section 230 protection to remain in force for the platforms that don't actively curate, or reorder & promote, or otherwise massage & manage the posts.
Which will allow small & new platforms to grow & flourish, as per the original intent of Section 230 /fin
Which will allow small & new platforms to grow & flourish, as per the original intent of Section 230 /fin
