@deflognsfw.bsky.social
Reposted
I really want to emphasize that this is a winnable fight, but everyone has to chip in in order to do so! Please dont sit it out expecting others to stand in your place!
And dont ignore local/state level stuff! As these state laws get overturned, the narrative behind the Fed ones lose steam!
And dont ignore local/state level stuff! As these state laws get overturned, the narrative behind the Fed ones lose steam!
#SaveSpeech
Netchoice won their legal battle against Age verification in louisiana! This follows similar rulings in AK and OH!
This is huge!
These laws can be stopped, they can be overturned. Do not give in to dooming! Keep calling your reps and support orgs that fight these laws in court!
Netchoice won their legal battle against Age verification in louisiana! This follows similar rulings in AK and OH!
This is huge!
These laws can be stopped, they can be overturned. Do not give in to dooming! Keep calling your reps and support orgs that fight these laws in court!
NetChoice Wins Permanent Block of Louisiana Age Verification Law, Protecting Free Speech and Parental Rights - NetChoice
BATON ROUGE, La.—Today, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana granted NetChoice’s motion for summary judgment in NetChoice v. Murrill, striking down Louisiana’s Act 456. The cou...
netchoice.org
December 16, 2025 at 1:39 AM
I really want to emphasize that this is a winnable fight, but everyone has to chip in in order to do so! Please dont sit it out expecting others to stand in your place!
And dont ignore local/state level stuff! As these state laws get overturned, the narrative behind the Fed ones lose steam!
And dont ignore local/state level stuff! As these state laws get overturned, the narrative behind the Fed ones lose steam!
Reposted
And yes, many of us believe companies have not lived up to their moral responsibilities on misinformation/moderation. But (a) no one agrees about what misinformation and moderatable content is and (b) there’s not really a first amendment compliant way to make them without shutting everything down.
December 14, 2025 at 6:08 AM
And yes, many of us believe companies have not lived up to their moral responsibilities on misinformation/moderation. But (a) no one agrees about what misinformation and moderatable content is and (b) there’s not really a first amendment compliant way to make them without shutting everything down.
Reposted
In short - Section 230 as it stands is absolutely core to how the internet functions today, and removing it would generate absolute legal chaos and probably result in the end of all social media, all comment sections and lots of basic internet hosting services. The liability would be insane.
December 14, 2025 at 6:00 AM
In short - Section 230 as it stands is absolutely core to how the internet functions today, and removing it would generate absolute legal chaos and probably result in the end of all social media, all comment sections and lots of basic internet hosting services. The liability would be insane.
Reposted
• That the previously understood differentiator between a ‘carrier’ that did not have any control on what was posted on their platform (ie. Did not moderate Any content) and a ‘publisher’ that was liable because they chose the content would no longer apply
December 14, 2025 at 5:56 AM
• That the previously understood differentiator between a ‘carrier’ that did not have any control on what was posted on their platform (ie. Did not moderate Any content) and a ‘publisher’ that was liable because they chose the content would no longer apply
Reposted
So the *point* of Section 230 was to say the following:
• Individual social media platforms are not responsible for user generated content, the original poster is and they can be sued
• The individual platforms are able to moderate those spaces to moderate their platforms without being sued
• Individual social media platforms are not responsible for user generated content, the original poster is and they can be sued
• The individual platforms are able to moderate those spaces to moderate their platforms without being sued
December 14, 2025 at 5:53 AM
So the *point* of Section 230 was to say the following:
• Individual social media platforms are not responsible for user generated content, the original poster is and they can be sued
• The individual platforms are able to moderate those spaces to moderate their platforms without being sued
• Individual social media platforms are not responsible for user generated content, the original poster is and they can be sued
• The individual platforms are able to moderate those spaces to moderate their platforms without being sued
Reposted
what is extra frustrating about the continued efforts to kill it is that none of them understand this
everyone attacking it is convinced that killing section 230 will allow them to remove some part of the internet that they don't like, be it content moderation or sex predators, but it's much worse
everyone attacking it is convinced that killing section 230 will allow them to remove some part of the internet that they don't like, be it content moderation or sex predators, but it's much worse
Bluntly, Section 230 is almost literally the law that the entire internet rests upon, it makes it possible for user generated content to exist on the internet, it’s incredibly important, and genuinely we must defend it at all costs. This place literally would not exist without it.
December 14, 2025 at 6:45 AM
what is extra frustrating about the continued efforts to kill it is that none of them understand this
everyone attacking it is convinced that killing section 230 will allow them to remove some part of the internet that they don't like, be it content moderation or sex predators, but it's much worse
everyone attacking it is convinced that killing section 230 will allow them to remove some part of the internet that they don't like, be it content moderation or sex predators, but it's much worse