congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1865 The bill changes section 230 of the CDA, the law that protects website owners from liability for what their users post, to carve out an exception for instances of human trafficking. Site owners can be held liable and subject to a criminal fine or imprisonment for not more than 20 years.
WHAT THIS MEANS IN PRACTICE IS THAT ALL IT WOULD TAKE FOR A WEBSITE TO BE SHUT DOWN AND ITS OWNER ARRESTED IS A FALSE FLAG OPERATION OF SPOOKS ENGAGING IN HUMAN TRAFFICKING. ALL U.S. SITES WOULD BECOME FORCED TO IMPOSE EXTREMELY HEAVY-HANDED MODERATION AND CENSORSHIP OR SHUT DOWN ENTIRELY, Zig Forums INCLUDED.
THIS BILL HAS STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AND WILL LIKELY PASS UNLESS HEAVY RESISTANCE CAN BE ORGANIZED QUICKLY AND ON A LARGE SCALE.
Voting on the House Floor is scheduled for THIS TUESDAY. Start spreading this information on as many websites as you can before it's too late. If you know anyone with a large audience try and get them to spread the word. If this bill becomes law then it's GAME OVER for free speech on the internet.
Would it free me from this ecstasy drip-feed of internet entertainment ?
Gabriel Watson
well, it was trumps idea, and god-emperor trump can do no wrong, so you must be wrong, and this is fake news...
Angel Torres
I'm frankly astonished how far this law got. I was telling my friends about it a few months ago, and they basically all said something like' "Oh, you know how lawmakers overshoot, right. This bill is way too insane to pass on its own. The only reason why it exists is so that those very same lawmakers can point at it when they pass less extreme but equally insane censorship laws and say, 'Well you think we're insane, but have a look at this. Compared to them, our solution is totally moderate, eh?'"
No, but it'll make it harder for sites like 8ch to exist, because they have to bear the legal burden of the 0.01% of posts that are transgressive in some way. Ironically, much of what this bill does actually helps conceal instances of sex trafficking by incentivizes social media sites to block posts before the ever get sent and not report the posts that do violate this law.
Carter Smith
Poor bait. Did you conveniently miss the part of the post that says "STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT"?
Thomas Jackson
Fucking hell not again
Jose Flores
It's not bait and it doesn't matter if it has le "STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT" because it really came out of Trump's mind.
Brandon Harris
Exactly this. Faceberg and Snapshit will be fine, because they have (((lawyers))) to help insulate them from laws like this. Owners of small sites, forums, services, etc. don't.
