They have the means to defend themselves at least, they are likely less worried. I would assume repealing 230 means smaller communities close down and their members flock to Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. Which is good for clicks but bad once they realize they have "problematic" people who can get them sued repeatedly now flooding their platform.
This will still affect them. Between wasting a ton of money on lawyers and/or purging anything remotely offensive (it's on the both sides, meaning "still can be taken to court") or keeping things the same, they will likely prefer the latter. If threat is real, they are bound to react somehow, unless they know something, that we don't.
I look forward to Congressvermin who people don't like getting Twitter sued. If every politician they have on there gets them constantly sued they're getting rid of that shit, or putting an indemnification agreement into their TOS so if you get them sued, you owe them their legal fees. These fuckers will pay for this if they do it.
Twitter should be worried considering all the "All Trump supporters are child rapists who should die!" People on there and the fact that there are 400 cases of allegations being thrown around on there every hour of every day. I wouldn't say good things wouldn't come from repealing Section 230, but they definitely aren't worth what we have to give up.
That's what I'm talking about - they should realize all the seriousness of the situation, because repealing of 230 benefits no one and I don't think something like this can happen without some negotiations in the background, so if the repealing is really imminent, then they would react somehow. Otherwise either there is still no concrete answer and bargaining is still going or they know Trump is full of shit.
So basically the same as most other presidents.
I don't know if they've actually used it for bullshit little claims that get smacked down with 230 currently. If it started costing them six figures every time they wouldn't be able to afford not to try to get it back, especially from millionaires like most of Congress.
Am I correct in guessing that this would cause them to ban all unidentified accounts, and check their users' credit score?
Something like that could be necessary. Courts would have to spend the next 30 years working out doctrines for dealing with it much as they did with 230 and it would be a gigantic mess in the meantime. Probably America would lose its dominance over the Internet and our economy would be wrecked but I guess Trump doesn't care so long as he gets his butthurt soothed.
It's a bit late to be upset about America losing its dominance over the Internet after, for example, Obama gave away IANA.
Obama didn't threaten to build a wall to keep evil Mexicans out. Because it was a dumbfuck idea to begin with. People are supposed to live their lives off a $600 stimulus and he wanted to blow money on a wall saying Mexico would pay for it.
I was more referring to incompetence/failure to do anything of note or value, but you do you.
Screwing over his investors has been his entire career.
If you believe the GOP even understands what 230 entails then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
