Section 230 of the 1996 CDA Needs a Facelift

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 was a critical piece of legislation that offered a shield to internet platforms against legal liability for content posted by users. 

Today, nearly 30 years later, Section 230 is entangled in a web of controversy, facing mounting challenges in the modern digital landscape.

Section 230 was written before the advent of social media and AI. 

The idea was that AOL shouldn't be legally responsible for someone who sends illegal content through AOL email- anything from child porn to death threats against politicians. 

Think of it like a restaurant that mob bosses meet at to discuss mob business every day.  The restaurant owner isn't responsible for the discussions had in his business. 

However, if the owner of the restaurant advertised that mob bosses were safe discussing murder at his restaurant, that he welcomed them to do so, participated in the discussions, and even paid them to have those specific discussions at his restaurant, he's then part of the illegal activity.

That's where we are with Xitter and Elon Musk.

Xitter should be subject to wrongful death suits when they allow harassing, stalking behavior, even after multiple complaints and reports, that leads to a murder or suicide.

They should be viewed as facilitators when they ignore notices of abuse, and especially if they condone, permit, and even celebrate the activity.