Articles with #CensorshipNation

Showing 2 of 2 articles

Advertisement

Deeplinks on in internet
#FreeSpeechUnderFire #TerrorOfTheInternet #CensorshipNation #TechRevolt #SocialMediaUnderAttack #SilencingTheVoiceless #DigitalRightsInJeopardy #TheFightForTheFuture #OnlineFreedomAtRisk #UnsayableTruths #ProtectingThe #BreakingPointForTech #UnchartedTerritoryOfCensorship #CyberWarfareOnFreeSpeech #GlobalStandForAutonomy

Discussion Points

  1. The Impact of Weakening Section 230 on Online Speech: How would a weakening of Section 230 affect online users' ability to express themselves freely, and what are the potential consequences for online platforms and services?
  2. The Role of the DOJ in Regulating Online Content: What is the appropriate scope of government intervention in regulating online content, and how do the proposals from the DOJ align with or diverge from this principle?
  3. The Intersection of Free Speech and Law Enforcement: How can law enforcement agencies balance their efforts to combat illegal content with the need to protect users' free speech rights, and what are the implications for online platforms and services?

Summary

In 2020, President Trump's Executive Order aimed at retaliating against online services that fact-checked him prompted a DOJ team to finalize a proposal to weaken Section 230. This key law protects internet users' speech by shielding online intermediaries from civil suits based on user-generated content.

The proposed amendments would have significantly narrowed these protections, allowing for federal and state prosecution of online services hosting illegal content. Documents reveal the DOJ's plan was influenced by meeting with attorneys who brought lawsuits against online services and were caught off guard by Trump's Executive Order.

EFF is challenging the administration's actions.

As President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order in 2020 to retaliate against online services that fact-checked him, a team within the Department of Justice (DOJ) was finalizing a proposal to subst...

Read Full Article »

Deeplinks on in internet
#CensorshipNation #TAKEITDOWNActFailed #FreeSpeechMatters #TechIntegrityMatters #ProtectingVictimsNotCensoringTruth #TheDarkSideOfCensorship #TAKEITDOWNAct #InternetFreedomFighters #TheRealCostOfProtection #TruthOverFear #TechnoLiberationFront #CensorshipConsequences #ProtectingTheUnprotectedNotTheSystem #HoldTheLineForFreeSpeech

Discussion Points

  1. Is the TAKE IT DOWN Act a necessary step to protect victims of non-consensual intimate imagery, or does it pose a threat to free speech and user privacy?
  2. How can the bill's provisions be balanced to address concerns around online content removal while minimizing the risk of censorship and overreach?
  3. What exemptions or safeguards should be included in the bill to protect encrypted services and prevent them from being forced to compromise user privacy?

Summary

The TAKE IT DOWN Act has raised concerns about its potential to speed up the removal of non-consensual intimate imagery online, but at the cost of threatening free expression and user privacy. The bill's notice-and-takedown system could lead to overreach and censorship, particularly with broad definitions and lack of safeguards.

Exemptions for encrypted services are also unclear, posing a threat to private conversations and end-to-end encryption. Critics argue that the bill does not adequately address the problem it claims to solve and would instead create a far broader internet censorship regime than existing laws like the DMCA.

Congress has begun debating the TAKE IT DOWN Act (S. 146), a bill that seeks to speed up the removal of a troubling type of online content: non-consensual intimate imagery, or NCII. In recent years, c...

Read Full Article »