[heavyset_go]

> Now, obviously there's the question of, how many restrictions until you're a publisher? I'm not sure the law is clear on that.

As a provider for interactive computer services, you're afforded unlimited restrictions on the content you choose to serve. Section 230 of the CDA applies to all interactive computer services and their providers, no matter what.

From the EFF[1]:

> Section 230 says that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" (47 U.S.C. § 230). In other words, online intermediaries that host or republish speech are protected against a range of laws that might otherwise be used to hold them legally responsible for what others say and do. The protected intermediaries include not only regular Internet Service Providers (ISPs), but also a range of "interactive computer service providers," including basically any online service that publishes third-party content. Though there are important exceptions for certain criminal and intellectual property-based claims, CDA 230 creates a broad protection that has allowed innovation and free speech online to flourish.

[1] https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230

[TulliusCicero]

Thanks for this. Though I'm not gonna trust it 100%, even though I like what it says, since, y'know, the EFF is obviously more inclined towards that take.

[heavyset_go]

That interpretation of Section 230 has been exactly what courts have ruled in favor of for years now. It has tomes of precedence in case law.