Follow

您对230条款的态度是?

Section 230的关键内容见下方英文。(“它让互联网服务提供商不必为用户发布的内容负责,同时又给予了平台“善意”审查用户发布内容的自由”——这是WSJ的中文解释,仅供您参考)

(c) Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material

(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

(2) Civil liabilityNo provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—

(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or

(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph.

@digforfire 事情就是那么简单,“我们保留在没有事先通知的情况下随时终止您部分或全部服务的权力”。除非有技术施加的限制,否则任何服务条款都可以归结成这一句话。

@digforfire
觉得霍师傅说得很好
虽然section 230远非完美
但现阶段拿不出比这更好的解决方案
之前在群里讨论,有群友提出过信息化防垄断的一些设想,比如立法要求互联网企业必须使用开放式的架构等,避免流量分发权的寡头聚集
虽然想法不错,但不具备可行性
youtube.com/watch?v=oYajIfS9mP

Sign in to participate in the conversation
掘火长毛象

A change of speed, a change of style
A change of scene, with no regrets