this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
1264 points (97.2% liked)
Lemmy.World Announcements
29084 readers
203 users here now
This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.
Follow us for server news π
Outages π₯
https://status.lemmy.world/
For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.
Support e-mail
Any support requests are best sent to info@lemmy.world e-mail.
Report contact
- DM https://lemmy.world/u/lwreport
- Email report@lemmy.world (PGP Supported)
Donations π
If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.
If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us
Join the team
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Fyi, admins have the protection of federal law to not be held responsible, as long as they take action when it happens.
They have very low to zero legal risk, as long as they're doing their job.
IANAL, but I can read laws.
Correct, emphasis mine. As long as they take action when it happens being the key phrase here.
IANAL but from what I understand, doing something to take action (removing content, disabling communites, banning users, all of the above) shows that they are working to remove the content. This is why previously when having conversations with people about the topic of piracy I mentioned DCMA takedown notices and how the companies Iβve worked at responded to those with extreme importance (sometimes the higher ups would walk over to the devs and make sure the content was deleted).
Iβm annoyed at people in this thread who believe that the admins did the wrong thing, because turning off communities could cause users to go to another instance - who cares, this is bigger than site engagement. Iβm annoyed at people who think that the devs had access to code which could prevent this issue but chose not to implement that code - this is a larger and much more difficult problem that canβt just be coded away, it usually involves humans to verify the code is working and correct false-positives and false-negatives.
You misunderstood what I meant by the part that you highlighted of my comment.
I'm speaking of Safe Harbor provisions, not having to take active DCMA actions. They're two very different things.