> because even unmoderated unreviewed content will carry far higher risk of liability than today
If it as OP says, the opposite would be true. Either moderate and risk liability. Or allow anything and get indemnity.
If it as OP says, the opposite would be true. Either moderate and risk liability. Or allow anything and get indemnity.
OP is wrong because there is also significant distributor liability (which applies even without he kind of active review that creates publisher liability), notably—at least, this is the specific subject matter that got the issue with regard to 230 to the Supreme Court—for defamatory content, and while 230 expressly only protects against publisher liability, the Supreme Court has found that, where it otherwise applies, it is also a bar for distributor liability for content.
Even if this only applied to defamatory content, the risk of defamation lawsuits would eliminate unmoderated public fora without 230.