IT.COM

news US Internet Was Censored While You Slept

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

mr-x

Account Closed (Requested)
Impact
46,458
TDLR: is a bill written under the guise of stopping sex trafficking, has stripped away the protection of section 230 of the Communications act of 1934 which means companies that run web services will soon be responsible for the actions of their users, even if they are unaware of them, to the point of criminal charges that could result in up to 25 years in prison. This seems possibly to apply retroactively, meaning websites could be punished for stuff their users did, before this became a law.

Craigslist has removed their personals section,
https://www.craigslist.org/about/FOSTA


Reddit purging anything that might get them in trouble.


EFF.org:
Frankenstein Bill Combines the Worst of SESTA and FOSTA. Tell Your Representative to Reject New Version of H.R. 1865.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/02/fosta-would-be-disaster-online-communities



Lifted from "imgur.com/gallery/LJAeNVY"
 
Last edited:
11
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
I saw that on my twitter feed this morning... Craigslist has taken down their personals section in response from what I saw and I heard dating sites are considering what repercussions this will have on them.

I have not researched the law yet to know enough to speak about it. I have heard it was made to target sites like BackPage (I think it was) that supposedly aids in human trafficking.

While I think there definitely should be something should be done to help police these types of activities on the internet - I will need to read more into the law before I have any opinion on rather it is over-reaching or not.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Madness, absolute madness.

On the same logic, the US federal reserve should be held accountable for the actions of their users, even if they are unaware of them. :) - So if someone uses money to pay for drugs then the US federal reserve should be held accountable for providing the tools for the transaction to be completed.

Oh well, it's all good..soon it will all be decentralized. :)
 
7
•••
I think there is a clause, "knowingly" that would protect website owners from a malicous user but seems to break an open Internet.

Could put a damper on innovation if you have to worry about how any user will use / abuse your app.
 
1
•••
The Cloud Act was passed too, which is equally bad. As always, government granting itself exorbitant rights while restricting your own.
 
2
•••
Time to take down all the dating sites in that case.
 
0
•••
I read the changes of the specific law text and at least the truth is, from what I could tell, the law was only changed for very specific types of cases that really do involve trafficking, so unless your involved in that sort of thing, you should not need to worry too much from these specific changes. I hate change and I prefer power to the website operator, but this may have been a necessary change, in defense of the mission.
 
Last edited:
4
•••
1
•••
CNN journo's better think twice before visiting MY
 
1
•••
CNN journo's better think twice before visiting MY

Funny, isn’t that the truth. As you pointed out with the US law, in the future is this goal to silencing dissidents everywhere?, It seems to a trend. The GDRP in the EU being imposed around the world imo, is ridiculous just like this is. To me, such laws should be regional only. What country would cooperate and allow a foreign country to extradite their own citizens? All? A few? International censorship laws? The subject disturbs me looking at the entire world as though it is one jurisdiction on non criminal matters, where the line is drawn, etc.
 
1
•••
Section 230 of the Communications Act didn't give any protection to Ross Ulbricht.
So what good was it anyways?
 
0
•••
I read the changes of the specific law text and at least the truth is, from what I could tell, the law was only changed for very specific types of cases

The problem with these scenarios, is that the bill may be created with the best intentions but there are always people in authority who will bastardize and abuse it.

One day you're running a website and the next your home is being invaded by a JSOC team because some user posted a funny picture of Donald Trump.
 
0
•••
One day you're running a website and the next your home is being invaded by a JSOC team because some user posted a funny picture of Donald Trump.

all pictures of Trump are funny looking ;)

imo....
 
1
•••
Section 230 of the Communications Act didn't give any protection to Ross Ulbricht.
So what good was it anyways?

I seem to remember a murder plot .
 
0
•••
The problem with these scenarios, is that the bill may be created with the best intentions but there are always people in authority who will bastardize and abuse it.

One day you're running a website and the next your home is being invaded by a JSOC team because some user posted a funny picture of Donald Trump.

Problem with our US system, Congress lets bureaucrats interpret laws. Unless the law is narrowly written, chances are good it will expand.
 
0
•••
In India, internet is heavily censored, only positive news is preferred
 
0
•••
You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.
 
0
•••
It hurts when you are the egg.
 
1
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back