Do you also object to HN moderation? Why should dang be allowed to ban people but not twitter? Do you think dang should accept legal liability for everything people post on HN?
It's good to ask those questions, of course small companies are affected too.
But, for example, if Dang selectively removed posts such that the remaining posts slandered someone in a way that none of the individual posters intended, I believe Dang would be the only one in the chain liable for the resulting slander, not the posters. But under current law, Dang has protection under 230, so no one could get charged for the resulting slander
I only object that they get both the rights of platform and publisher. they are free to moderate however they wish but once they do they should be liable for the content of their platform. No other publishers are not held liable.
But, for example, if Dang selectively removed posts such that the remaining posts slandered someone in a way that none of the individual posters intended, I believe Dang would be the only one in the chain liable for the resulting slander, not the posters. But under current law, Dang has protection under 230, so no one could get charged for the resulting slander
That's an extreme hypothetical case of course.