Prof. Victor Menaldo was interviewed on KUOW regarding possible changes for Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, and why a change would be bad for the internet and innovation in general.
"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."
You may not totally understand what that means, but some say these are the 26 words that made the internet what it is today. And congress may be ready to repeal them.
Written and passed in 1996, the law Section 230 shields websites from being held responsible for the content users post. In other words, platforms like Facebook, Instagram and Reddit can’t be sued for what people share there. But now, a growing bipartisan group of lawmakers believes Section 230 goes too far and are considering a repeal.
The impact? … It could totally reshape the way the internet works.
Does Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act law go too far?
Prof. Menaldo notes the following:
Encourages a lot of experimentation and innovation.
Protections of Section 230 helped give birth to big tech and has powered the Artificial Intelligence revolution.
If repealed, big tech would have more legal options and resources from lawsuits but smaller platforms would not have the legal firepower to resist law suits and the startups would suffer the most from lawsuits, stifling innovation.
Users of the internet would see more censorship in the form of less discussion and innovation for fear of legal challenges. Less creativity, innovation, less startups.
Section 230 protects vibrancy of the internet.
Please link here for the interview on KUOW (14 minutes).