SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the glad-we-are-not-hosted-down-under dept.
CNN shut down its Facebook page in Australia after court liability ruling:
CNN shut down its Facebook page in Australia on Wednesday, after an Australian court ruled that media outlets are liable for defamatory user-generated comments.
[...] The deteriorating effects of the court's ruling on online speech in Australia serve as a warning of what's to come if U.S. lawmakers succeed in their efforts to weakening protections against such legal decisions in the United States.
[...] The court's ruling previews the grim future in store if U.S. politicians get their way and dismantle Section 230, the keystone U.S. law that shields websites from liability over user-generated content. Without it, social media platforms and any other website with user-generated content—especially those without Facebook's deep pockets—would likely die. Both Republicans and Democrats, President Joe Biden included, would like it dismantled.
Should the person doing the defaming be liable, or the owner of the page the defamation is posted on be liable?
(Score: 2, Troll) by FatPhil on Friday October 01 2021, @08:16AM (7 children)
how about we ask *for what* should whoever is liable be liable. Liable for posting something that offended somebody? That's no liability at all, and should just be ignored, any idiot can fake offence at anything. For spreading misinformation? How about you presume *everything* thereupon, unless it's from a trusted original source, be considered untrustworthy. "I believed a rando on the internet - he must be punished" is retarded - you should be punished for your stupidity. Here's a Tide pod, you know what to do with it, try it in the veins next time.
Channelling Louis CK's nuts: Of course we should be concerned about what's being propagated over the internet. But maybe...
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 01 2021, @09:35AM
The answer is literally "defamation" in this case. Not that anyone really cares about suing about the rest because defamation is where the big money is and it is surprisingly easy to prove in many places.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Friday October 01 2021, @02:48PM (1 child)
> Liable for posting something that offended somebody? That's no liability at all, and should just be ignored
Well that depends entirely on the country of the people and companies involved
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Saturday October 02 2021, @09:12AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday October 01 2021, @03:51PM (1 child)
Let's pretend all the sexual allegations about Louis CK were fake, someone lied about him and spread it around the internet. Then he lost all his jobs and income because of these lies.
You think that would be totally fine and the liars should face no repercussions at all?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Saturday October 02 2021, @08:47AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Saturday October 02 2021, @01:43PM (1 child)
You seem to think slander should be legal. I doubt there's a country in the world that allows slander. WTF is wrong with you? "Offended somebody?" I see you're not a RINO [mcgrew.info]. Are you also in favor of posting dangerous Covid misinformation, like injecting anti-worm medication for horses, things that could be deadly?
Carbon, The only element in the known universe to ever gain sentience
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday October 03 2021, @07:55AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves