nanog mailing list archives
Re: Parler
From: Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2021 16:30:41 -0800
On 1/10/21 4:00 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
sronan () ronan-online com <sronan () ronan-online com>:While Amazon is absolutely within their rights to suspend anyone they want for violation of their TOS, it does create an interesting problem. Amazon is now in the content moderation business, which could potentially open them up to liability if they fail to suspend any other customer who hosts objectionable content. When I actively hosted USENET servers, I was repeatedly warned by in-house and external counsel, not to moderate which groups I hosted based on content, less I become responsible for moderating all groups, shouldn’t that same principal apply to platforms like AWS and Twitter?Yes, it would. This was an astonnishingly stupid move on AWS's part; I'm prett sure their counsel was not conmsulted.
Surely everyone on this list, purportedly a network operators list, has to have at least heard of 47 USC Section 230... right?
Current thread:
- Re: not a utility, was Parler, (continued)
- Re: not a utility, was Parler Rod Beck (Jan 11)
- Re: not a utility, was Parler Karl Auer (Jan 11)
- Re: not a utility, was Parler Sabri Berisha (Jan 11)
- Re: the tiny domain business, not a utility, was Parler John Levine (Jan 11)
- Re: the tiny domain business, not a utility, was Parler Randy Bush (Jan 11)
- Re: not a utility, was Parler Matthew Petach (Jan 11)
- Re: Parler and the total legality of content moderation John Levine (Jan 10)
- Re: Parler Michael Thomas (Jan 10)
- Re: Parler Seth Mattinen (Jan 10)
- Re: do we know what laws apply to Parler John Levine (Jan 10)
- Re: Parler Randy Bush (Jan 10)
- Re: Parler Bryan Fields (Jan 11)
- Re: Parler Michael Thomas (Jan 11)
- Re: Parler Jason Kuehl (Jan 11)