by Tdarcos » Thu Nov 24, 2016 9:00 pm
I want to add one more thing. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act resulted from the court case of Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy Services Company in which there was a board that users of Prodigy could post things, I think it was an investment board.
Now, if Prodigy had simply done nothing and left stuff there, they would essentially be in the clear under Common Carrier rules, or why neither Comcast nor Verizon is liable if you are using their facilities to download pirated material.
But, Prodigy had moderators (like Ben) who removed some items either because they were untrue, spam or pump-and-dump stock selling schemes, or other objectional material. This then placed them in the same status as a publisher of a newspaper who is then liable because they make decisions about content.
Consider that: a message board that leaves all the garbage has immunity for user postings but a board that tries to clean up the trash is now liable for them. Does this make any sense?
Congress didn't think so, so it added Section 230 which gives the operator (and users) of a message board common carrier immunity for what other people place on their system, and does not make them liable even if they exercise editorial judgment in deleting inappropriate items.
So this is why no one here - except, at worse, maybe the person who actually posted it - has any liability, either civil or criminal, for the posting of that image. And for them to have any liability, a federal court (or possibly a State Court in the jurisdiction where the server hosting this BBS is located) would have to find the image was obscene after a jury trial.
And for that to even happen, someone would have to ask the FBI or a state or federal prosecutor to investigate. So, in simple terms, again, while someone could report it, no one here is obligated to do so.
And, if nobody reports it, then there will be no issue raised about whether or not it's objectionable, (hint, hint). If the cops don't know about it, they can't arrest anyone, if you get my drift. In short, while there is no criminal and no civil liability in the first place, if it's not reported - since no one here is under any obligation to do so - the question will never even be raised by the authorities.
I felt it was important to do these two long messages as I wanted to let you understand that on this point I do know what I am talking about.
I want to add one more thing. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act resulted from the court case of [i]Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy Services Company[/i] in which there was a board that users of Prodigy could post things, I think it was an investment board.
Now, if Prodigy had simply done nothing and left stuff there, they would essentially be in the clear under Common Carrier rules, or why neither Comcast nor Verizon is liable if you are using their facilities to download pirated material.
But, Prodigy had moderators (like Ben) who removed some items either because they were untrue, spam or pump-and-dump stock selling schemes, or other objectional material. This then placed them in the same status as a publisher of a newspaper who is then liable because they make decisions about content.
Consider that: a message board that leaves all the garbage has immunity for user postings but a board that tries to clean up the trash is now liable for them. Does this make any sense?
Congress didn't think so, so it added Section 230 which gives the operator (and users) of a message board common carrier immunity for what other people place on their system, and does not make them liable even if they exercise editorial judgment in deleting inappropriate items.
So this is why no one here - except, at worse, [i]maybe[/i] the person who actually posted it - has any liability, either civil or criminal, for the posting of that image. And for them to have any liability, a federal court (or possibly a State Court in the jurisdiction where the server hosting this BBS is located) would have to find the image was obscene after a jury trial.
And for that to even happen, someone would have to ask the FBI or a state or federal prosecutor to investigate. So, in simple terms, again, while someone could report it, no one here is obligated to do so.
And, if nobody reports it, then there will be no issue raised about whether or not it's objectionable, (hint, hint). If the cops don't know about it, they can't arrest anyone, if you get my drift. In short, while there is no criminal and no civil liability in the first place, if it's not reported - since no one here is under any obligation to do so - the question will never even be raised by the authorities.
I felt it was important to do these two long messages as I wanted to let you understand that on this point I do know what I am talking about.