MESSAGE
| DATE | 2020-09-23 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] isp immunity under threat...
|
wsj.com
WSJ News Exclusive | DOJ to Seek Congressional Curbs on Immunity for
Internet Companies
Ryan Tracy and Brent Kendall
8-9 minutes
WASHINGTON—The Justice Department will submit a proposal to Congress on
Wednesday to curb longstanding legal protections for internet companies
such as Facebook Inc., Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Twitter Inc. and force
them to shoulder more responsibility for managing content on their
sites, a senior department official said.
The proposal advances two main goals the Trump administration and the
department outlined in June: encouraging online platforms to actively
address illicit conduct and manage content on their sites in fair and
consistent ways.
The department refined its proposal in the intervening months based on
feedback from market participants and other stakeholders such as
victims’ rights groups. As a result of that process, the department made
some changes, including clarifying that internet companies would have
immunity when they take down material that promotes violent extremism or
self-harm, the official said.
President Trump is also scheduled to discuss “protecting consumers from
social media abuses” at a meeting Wednesday with state attorneys
general, according to the White House.
While the legislation is unlikely to pass during a busy and contentious
election year, Congress could take up the proposal or others like it
next year. Both Democrats and Republicans say they want to review the
legal protections internet companies enjoy, though they have differing
concerns.
A tweet by President Trump in May was flagged by Twitter as inciting
violence.
Photo: Jaap Arriens/Zuma Press
Mr. Trump and GOP lawmakers have complained about what they say are
biased decisions to censor social-media posts or block certain users.
Democrats, including presidential nominee and former Vice President Joe
Biden, say platforms need to do more to curb the spread of false
information.
Both parties worry about the role of online platforms in facilitating
criminal activity, and that issue is a focus of the Justice Department’s
proposal. It targets Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of
1996, which gives internet platforms broad latitude to police their
sites and shields them from legal liability related to users’ actions,
except in relatively narrow circumstances.
The proposal would remove Section 230 legal immunity when online
platforms don’t live up to certain standards. For example, they could
lose legal protections if they facilitate criminal activity or know of
unlawful conduct but don’t restrict and report it. They could also face
liability if they don’t spell out content-moderation practices and
follow them consistently, including by explaining the basis for
decisions to restrict users’ access.
The proposal also wouldn’t confer immunity to platforms in cases of
online child exploitation and sexual abuse, terrorism or cyberstalking.
Those carve-outs are needed to allow victims to seek redress, the
department has said.
The tech industry has opposed efforts to change or repeal Section 230,
saying it has enabled internet platforms to blossom without fear of
excessive lawsuits.
Representatives of Facebook, Twitter and Google testified before the
Senate a year ago this month.
Photo: jim lo scalzo/Shutterstock
“The world before Section 230 was one where platforms faced liability
for removing things like spam or profanity,” the Internet Association, a
trade group representing Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc. and others, said in
June. “The threat of litigation for every content moderation decision
would hamper IA member companies’ ability to set and enforce community
guidelines and quickly respond to new challenges.”
Tech companies also say they don’t manage content based on political
considerations. This year social-media companies have shifted from a
hands-off approach to a more active one toward Mr. Trump’s conduct on
social media. Twitter in May applied a fact-checking notice to a post
about voter fraud by the president, a first.
Days later Twitter attached a notice to another post by Mr. Trump about
violent protests in Minneapolis in response to the killing of George
Floyd while in police custody. The post violated the company’s rules
about glorifying violence, the notice said.
Facebook left untouched a similar post about the protests, calling it
political speech but later clashed with Mr. Trump when it removed some
Trump campaign ads and some of the president’s statements about the
coronavirus.
Days after Twitter’s move in May, Mr. Trump signed an executive order
pushing federal agencies to take a more active role in regulating how
online platforms police content. The tech industry has said the move
would exceed the agencies’ authority under current law. The Federal
Communications Commission is reviewing public comments on that initiative.
The administration’s moves to target Section 230 don’t have direct
consequences for social-media companies in the near term. However, the
actions raise the odds of a future crackdown while also casting Mr.
Trump as a defender of conservatives against tech firms that Republicans
say operate with a liberal bias.
“Online censorship goes far beyond the issue of free speech. It’s also
one of protecting consumers and ensuring they are informed of their
rights and resources to fight back under the law,” White House spokesman
Judd Deere said before the president’s Wednesday meeting with Republican
state attorneys general. “State attorneys general are on the front lines
of this issue, and President Trump wants to hear their perspectives.”
Members of Congress have proposed their own ideas to narrow tech firms’
legal immunity. A bill introduced earlier this month by three
influential Republican senators seeks to restrict companies from
claiming immunity because they deemed content “objectionable,” requiring
them to instead meet a more specific standard. The Justice Department’s
proposal has a similar provision.
Another bipartisan proposal, termed the “EARN IT Act,” could open the
companies up to lawsuits from survivors of online abuse by giving the
victims legal recourse if the companies don’t “earn” Section 230
immunity by following reasonable practices for dealing with harmful content.
Democrats, for their part, say GOP accusations of political bias by tech
companies are unfounded, pointing out that conservative content is
widely available on Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms. But they
agree Section 230 needs review, and top Democrats on Capitol Hill have
said they plan to discuss the matter in the coming months.
Mr. Biden called in January for revoking Section 230 altogether, though
he hasn’t outlined if or how he would replace it.
—Alex Leary contributed to this article.
Write to Ryan Tracy at ryan.tracy-at-wsj.com and Brent Kendall at
brent.kendall-at-wsj.com
--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com
Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013
_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|
