What does this decision mean in simple English? Rupert Am 17.06.2014 09:08 schrieb "Martijn Hoekstra" <[email protected]>:
> On Jun 17, 2014 3:55 AM, "Kevin Godfrey" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > 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 > > Don't they already do that? I see office actions on rare occasions. > > --Martijn > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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> > _______________________________________________ > 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> _______________________________________________ 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>
