|
|
|
|
|
by ilikehurdles
2100 days ago
|
|
> So our legislation is pretty clear on the matter, Twitter does not have the right to censor you simply because they're a private business while also maintaining liability immunity as a common carrier. There's a line between removing content and creating/editing content, especially when it's attributed to someone else. When you, publisher, start modifying others' content, it's reasonable that you become liable for the result. If you choose not to publish certain authors, for any reason goes against your acceptable use policies, I don't see an issue. It's off-topic comments on a forum. Political comments on a cooking blog. Etc. You have pretty wide latitude to define what is acceptable on your publishing platform, and that definition shouldn't have to be fixed throughout time. > "Publishing platforms" don't have free speech rights as long as they choose to operate as common carriers Twitter is not a common carrier. Social media is not a public utility. They are publishers. |
|