> On 17 Jun 2014, at 4:17 am, edward <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 16/06/2014 21:07, Newyorkbrad wrote: >> In its decision, the Sixth Circuit takes a broad view of Section 230 and >> holds that Section 230 protection is not lost even where the website >> operator solicited contributors to post unsourced and uncorroborated "dirt" >> about anyone they pleased, and even where the website operator selected >> which contributions would be published. > Isn't that rather a bad thing? What was the rationale behind its view? >
Would this allow the WMF to exercise a degree of editorial control over the projects without jeopardizing their S230 immunity? I'm specifically thinking of BLPs. Kevin _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
