- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: YouTube: More than 100,000 videos and over 17,000 channels removed
Posted on 9/3/19 at 5:54 pm to gthog61
Posted on 9/3/19 at 5:54 pm to gthog61
quote:Why shouldn't YouTube be allowed to enforce whatever terms of service they want to on the people who use their forum?
Apparently you still don't understand what a "public forum" is and the difference between it and a "publisher".
2
Posted on 9/3/19 at 5:57 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Why shouldn't YouTube be allowed to enforce whatever terms of service they want to on the people who use their forum?
They can, but they will correctly and legally be treated like a publisher if they do so as opposed to an open forum. Several people have addressed this.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:08 pm to Douboy
quote:
classified as a platform and not a publisher?
There’s nothing in the law regarding this distinction. If you don’t want these companies censoring what you post on the internet on their websites which they created then don’t post on the internet on their websites which they created. Go stand in your front yard screaming “Melt cuck!!!” At the passing cars.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:20 pm to Flats
quote:Funny, they already do it and they are still considered a platform
They can, but they will correctly and legally be treated like a publisher if they do so as opposed to an open forum. Several people have addressed this.
I mean, you can consider it a publisher, you can also consider it a hot dog
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:37 pm to Tactical1
quote:
Apparently this board still doesn't understand the First Amendment.
The first states that the government cannot silence you speech, etc?
Most people know this.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:41 pm to cwill
quote:Section 230 of Communications Decency Act, passed by Congress in 1996 as part of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, cosponsored by both Republicans and Democrats, and the following USSC decision in Reno vs the ACLU, says otherwise.
There’s nothing in the law regarding this distinction.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:42 pm to JuiceTerry
There are a lot of lawyers who disagree, and the law has been posted here. As an open forum, they aren't and shouldn't be responsible if some jackleg posts the instructions for bombing a marathon with a pressure cooker and some other jackleg follows the instructions. The law protects them because they aren't providing or editing content. If they start to edit content then they're showing that they endorse the content they leave up, and it opens them up to all sorts of legal action.
What you or I consider them is immaterial. What the law considers them when they are inevitably sued might matter a great deal.
What you or I consider them is immaterial. What the law considers them when they are inevitably sued might matter a great deal.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:51 pm to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
Section 230 of Communications Decency Act, passed by Congress in 1996 as part of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, cosponsored by both Republicans and Democrats, and the following USSC decision in Reno vs the ACLU, says otherwise
Cite the provision that then fits into the publisher liability exclusion for websites. Do you really believe the gov can force websites to allow any shite to be posted and have no right to boot people or comments that they don’t want on a website??? There is absolutely no support in the law for this fantasy.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:53 pm to Flats
Under your construction you can’t have a website or forum that’s yours. Basically once you’ve created it, it would belong to the public.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:54 pm to NPComb
Bye bye YouTube. It's been nice knowing you.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:55 pm to Douboy
quote:
idiots like you
quote:
sensored
Sure guy, sure.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 8:57 pm to Flats
quote:They currently can't be sued in that regard because the law has already considered them a platform
What you or I consider them is immaterial. What the law considers them when they are inevitably sued might matter a great deal.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 9:02 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
They currently can't be sued in that regard because the law has already considered them a platform
And they have changed their behavior in a significant way, so that can and almost certainly will be reconsidered.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 9:03 pm to Flats
quote:
And they have changed their behavior in a significant way, so that can and almost certainly will be reconsidered.
No it won’t, because that’s not the law. JFC.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 9:04 pm to Flats
quote:which can easily be shored up by their terms of service
If they start to edit content then they're showing that they endorse the content they leave up,
It's hilarious to think that some people believe forcing YouTube into either publishing hate speech or being labeled a publisher is going to somehow lessen their censorship
Posted on 9/3/19 at 9:08 pm to Flats
I’m going to sue TD because every time I go into the Q thread and make fun of qtards my posts get whacked and I get banned!!!!
Posted on 9/3/19 at 10:43 pm to SlapahoeTribe
As well as Marsh vs. Alabama.
Big Tech should be sued into oblivion.
Big Tech should be sued into oblivion.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 10:50 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Why shouldn't YouTube be allowed to enforce whatever terms of service
Over half the channels I subscribe to got deleted and do not violate the terms of service in any way.
This post was edited on 9/3/19 at 10:51 pm
Posted on 9/3/19 at 11:03 pm to Jrv2damac
quote:Name 2
Over half the channels I subscribe to got deleted and do not violate the terms of service in any way.
Posted on 9/3/19 at 11:29 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
forcing YouTube into either publishing hate speech
There is no such thing as hate speech
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News