Comment on Microsoft endorses anti-LGBTQ online "child safety" bill KOSA night before Big Tech hearing (US Politics)

• thenexusofprivacy@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  In practice, when the AG threatens to sue and the law makes it clear that they’ll win (which KOSA currently does), companies will typically stop what they’re doing (or settle if the AG actually launches a suit)

  source

  • Aatube@kbin.social ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Wouldn’t the law only make clear they’ll win if it fits the law’s definition of harm?

    source

    • thenexusofprivacy@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      The law’s defintion of harm is extremely broad. Charlie Jane Anders has a good discussion of this in The Internet Is About to Get a Lot Worse:

      “This clause is so vaguely defined that attorneys general can absolutely claim that queer content violates it — and they don’t even need to win these lawsuits in order to prevail. They might not even need to file a lawsuit, in fact. The mere threat of an expensive, grueling legal battle will be enough to make almost every Internet platform begin to scrub anything related to queer people.”

      source

      • Aatube@kbin.social ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Hmm, I was the impression that Attorneys General could already sue whomever they want, success rates aside. Is that not the case?

        source

        • -> View More Comments