Petition to End Defamatory Content – From the Author, Lawyer
I spoke with one of the lawyers spearheading this initiative and I got some great insight that I wanted to share. Looking forward to your thoughts and feedback.
NO ONE SEEKS TO ABRDIGE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. What Section 230 does is give RUTHLESS INTERNET MOBSTER TYPES the fuel to destroy businesses and persons and then charge them THOUSANDS of dollars each month to “filter” the content. You don’t pay, its back up. Normally, an injuured party has recourse; i.e., file a lawsuit. Here there is none. If the defamation was in print or on T.V. or radio, a person can file a lawsuit. HERE, YOU HAVE TO GO DOWN IN RUIN.
WHEN THE LAW was enacted (CDA Section 230) this was not foreseen. Not that it has harmed hundreds of thousands of people and businesses, an exception needs to be carved out. THIS IS HOW laws change….we are ever evolving and so is the law.
MY EXCEPTION HARMS NO ONE…STILL ALLOWS THE WEB SITES TO MAKE MONEY – it is limited to ANONYMOUS AUTHORS. WHY? Because if its anonymous, the harmed person has no ability to sue anyone, just suffer the aftermath of a seriously harmed reputation.
IT would NOT require a Constitutional Amendment. In fact the proposed change in law does NOT infringe on First Amendment rights. The proposed law seeks to have a VERY LIMITED exception whereby if the Author of the post is Anonymous and the material is DEFAMATORY (not an opinion), and the injured person asks to take it down, it must come down. If the anonymous party wishes to state his name that’s different. This cures the present state of complete harm to the innocent victim. In print and other electronic media there are legal remedies for defamation. Here, the injured party has no recourse.
NO ONE WANTS TO REPEAL SECTION 230. That’s not the issue.The issue is carving a narrow exception to relieve injured parties from DEFAMATION with no recourse.
A Petition is one step in the process. The author/lawyer is trying to build a movement Kindly check this link on Change.org, I did a search and found other similar petitions.
One point the author/lawyer made, among the many aforementioned is this, “Perhaps some people might not care, until it happens to them.”
What do you think?