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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 01 2021, @01:32PM (4 children)
So CNN expects to be held liable for what a third party posts to the Fecesbook media outlet? I know that things are upside-down over there, but anyone care to explain why this would be CNN's problem, and not Facebook's? Or is this just a convenient excuse?
Also, does this apply only to user-generated comments or also to {GPT3,Tay}-generated comments?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday October 01 2021, @04:42PM
It is the law. You should know better than to expect it to make sense. Stop trying to be rational.
A law is needed! Because there are bad things on them intarweb tubes!
If you think a fertilized egg is a child but an immigrant child is not, please don't pretend your concerns are religious
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 01 2021, @08:46PM (2 children)
They are responsible for comments in much the same way as a newspaper is responsible for the content of the "Letters to the Editor" column. They can explicitly claim the views and opinions are not theirs, but they are still responsible if they publish defamatory letters.
All the court has done is said "You want to be a media outlet, no worries. By the way, you are responsible for what you publish the same as any other media outlet."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 02 2021, @02:36AM (1 child)
No, it's not the same way a newspaper is responsible for the "Letters to the Editor" column. The publishing platform of Facebook comments is Facebook, not CNN. This would be akin to the Washington Post running a section called "Letters to the Editor of Le Monde", and then Le Monde being held liable for the content of the letters published in the Washington Post.
So it's more like "you are responsible by association for what any other media outlet publishes under your name".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 02 2021, @07:15AM
While I could certainly see holding Fecebook responsible as well if they control content, the question would be; Does CNN have control over what shows up on their page?
The question of control is what is important. It is (usually) the publisher who gets sued, not the guy running the printing press.