Brendan Carr

@BrendanCarrFCC ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated No

Last Checked Jan. 24, 2021

Created

Thu Oct 29 00:19:30 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter for iPhone

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Brendan Carr @BrendanCarrFCC

@CowBlizzard @digiphile Not at all. An ICS always has the 1A right not to carry content. The question here is whether they can also invoke the statutory 230 immunity when they do so. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Oct. 29, 2020

Preceded By

Brendan Carr @BrendanCarrFCC

@digiphile That’s one possibility. Another (and I think more likely or more often occurring) is that ICSs would limit their take downs to those that meet the clarified statutory standard and thus the result would be more speech w/o any adversarial process. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Oct. 28, 2020

Followed By

Brendan Carr @BrendanCarrFCC

@jess_miers @digiphile Yep. I think courts have misread 230 by applying (c)(1) in cases where I read (c)(2) as applying instead. I get that folks disagree with me on this point, though. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Oct. 29, 2020