Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Or have congress roll back Section 230. If online publishers were held to the same libel standards as print publishers this problem would be instantly fixed.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communica...



230 covers a lot of situations. For example, it has been cited by a judge who ruled in favor a library, which was the defendant[0]. This protected the library's choice to let patrons use the internet on library computers. It's summarized in the Wikipedia article you shared.

If 230 disappears, I don't see how any websites would allow user comments. I really don't see how we'd have any websites where user content is the service's value (Pinterest, recipe sharing sites, LinkedIn, Reddit).

[0] http://www.techlawjournal.com/courts/kathleenr/20010306op.as...

Edited: removed repeated sentence


> I really don't see how we'd have any websites where user content is the service's value (Pinterest, recipe sharing sites, LinkedIn, Reddit).

There are a number of ways to go about moderation. The change would be minimal, or none, for sites that already apply a good faith strict moderation effort and horrid for sites that supply the minimal moderation required by criminal law.


So who do you hold responsible for the publishing of your comment? YC? @dang? Yourself?

If it's one of the first two, your comment will be queued and reviewed by one of the many editors that YC will pay for to review each individual comment to ensure it does not incur liability on their part for publication.

/s


Yes, user submissions would be reviewed to ensure compliance with a publishers terms and conditions. But then so much of the content on HN is always frequently reviewed for policy compliance.


It might not be instantly fixed, but everyone would know where things belonged.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: