What does this decision mean in simple English?
Rupert Am 17.06.2014 09:08 schrieb "Martijn Hoekstra" martijnhoekstra@gmail.com:
On Jun 17, 2014 3:55 AM, "Kevin Godfrey" kevin.darklight@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 Jun 2014, at 4:17 am, edward edward@logicmuseum.com wrote:
On 16/06/2014 21:07, Newyorkbrad wrote: In its decision, the Sixth Circuit takes a broad view of Section 230
and
holds that Section 230 protection is not lost even where the website operator solicited contributors to post unsourced and uncorroborated
"dirt"
about anyone they pleased, and even where the website operator
selected
which contributions would be published.
Isn't that rather a bad thing? What was the rationale behind its view?
Would this allow the WMF to exercise a degree of editorial control over
the projects without jeopardizing their S230 immunity? I'm specifically thinking of BLPs.
Kevin
Don't they already do that? I see office actions on rare occasions.
--Martijn
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe