Comment

You’re being downvoted because your assertion that hosts are responsible for what users upload is generally false.

(1) Treatment of Publisher or Speaker.—No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

(2) Civil Liability.—No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—

(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or

(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in [subparagraph (A)].

47 USC § 230c, a.k.a. Communications Decency Act 1996 § 230

source

Sort:hotnew top

deegeese@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
We’re talking Patreon rules not US law.

source
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Which is exactly why I said TOS and not the US laws. I don’t really agree with the laws here either, because they create a safe harbor for illegal ends, but I understand that it is a lot easier, and arguably better, to self-police the content. That is what Patreon is doing. They view it as a violation of their TOS to generate revenue on a site that knowingly and willingly hosts CSAM. I’m with Patreon on this one. This wasn’t the first offence, and there is no way that the person that runs the site doesn’t know that material is on there. Pleading ignorant isn’t going to work. Running anonymous file hosting, no matter how good your intentions, is going to bring out the worst of the internet, guaranteed. If you can somehow get around that logic, you’ve got a bright future with the NRA.

source
Xanza@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
This is not only incorrect (this particular law doesn’t apply here), but I can easily prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt.

backpage.com was shutdown despite their willingness to comply with the law because they were found to “facilitate” CSAM. Omegle was also temporarily shutdown for the same reasons. There have also been quite literally dozens of prosecutions of website admins on the dark web for offering a platform for CSAM despite them arguing in court that they had no control over what their users uploaded and quickly moderated the content when discovered. In the end none of it matters–as a provider of a service you are required to make it difficult to share CSAM, not just comply with the law when someone catches you with your pants down.

It bedevils me that people are so laissez-faire about literal fucking CP–AI generated or not.

And in spite of literally all of that, none of this has anything to do with US law. It’s Patron policy. They don’t want to service someone who constantly has issues with CSAM, and they have every right not to offer their services to catbox.

source