![New Twitter ToS released. Are you tired of winning yet? [750x777 - 108KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/vRL3Ez.jpg){kind=link}
The courts being completely corrupt doesn't make my argument wrong, just the courts stone cold evil. The same as them pretending for decades that you could murder babies because of a fictitious "right to privacy".
Not only is the argument wrong, the courts are correct on this one because property rights explain all aspects of what is right and wrong with section 230.
There are only two positions you can take on this issue:
You believe in property rights.
You don't believe in property rights.
There is no in between position. If you say things like, well, I don't all of your property rights I just want some of your property rights, you are a communist. It is that simple.
You either respect your property and everyone elses, or you don't. With property rights it is incredibly easy to decide what you are allowed and not allowed to do, you don't even need laws. If you don't believe in property rights and want to fiddle with other peoples property, then you need laws because those situations are incredibly complex to arbitrate.
Whose property is the content? If it belongs to the publisher, then they are responsible for it and can do what they want with it. If it doesnt belong to the platform, then they arent responsible for it and cant do whatever they want.
Correct. That is exactly how to think about it.
(post is archived)