Hacker News Reader

Comment by simula67 | Hacker News Reader

It is if Google wants DMCA safe harbour protections

I'm not sure what's behind the recent prevalence to this theory but that is false.

Also we should all want section 230 protection it's what preserves free speech online and the principle on which the whole web economy is built.

I don't like the idea that Google or any other entity can control how I think by presenting only one side of a story when the other side may have a reasonable objection, because it does not fit the politics of the operators of a platform. This is within the spirit of free speech.

I think it fair to say that if Google wants to be a publisher, they should be held accountable to the content they publish. If they want to be a neutral platform, they should not favor any particular viewpoint

What you want and what the law allows are different things, also just don't let any entity control how you think.

As for 'being held accountable' as publisher, I'm sure you're aware of many publishers that favor one side or one "viewpoint" in fact it's most of them, and they aren't being held accountable for that because we live in a free country.

They (publishers) actually are held accountable for the stuff they publish (e.g., publishing copyrighted material w/o permission will land you in the courtroom). This is why FB/Twitter/YouTube do not want to be publishers. However, because of their approach to moderation, they could wander in those waters.

They're not held legally accountable for political views.

The copyright stuff applies to everyone already.

Not political views, but slander/libel - publishers are liable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com