I don't understand why some people are so hellbent on eliminating Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which would only mean the most reasonable way to have UGC is to have none at all, because anything else leaves a non-zero probability of the UGC website operator (now being considered a publisher) being sued.
This is the only good take on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and the one that I agree with the most; since it would set the First Amendment as the bar for speech on social media, bringing parity to the protections we have elsewhere.
This is the only good take on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and the one that I agree with the most; since it would set the First Amendment as the bar for speech on social media, bringing parity to the protections we have elsewhere.