Comment on Brazil rules that social media platforms are responsible for users’ posts

• t3rmit3@beehaw.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  It will make it extremely risky from a liability standpoint to operate any platform that allows users content. The EFF has a bunch of writeups on these types of laws. This is the last of a 4-part series on them: Link

  Fediverse operators would for example be extremely vulnerable to lawsuits, because almost none of them can afford teams of lawyers to deal with claims, true or not, that they failed to enforce content policies.

  It gives power to large corporations like Meta and Xitter, who can afford to handle legal threats.

  source

  • knightly@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It also makes those large corporate platforms unappealing, which is a very good thing for those of us who have always said that federation is a half-step towards proper decentralization.

    source
• sik0fewl@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Consider a Brazilian Lemmy instance. They will have to remove everything anyone complains about.

  There’s no way to tell legitimate requests from illegitimate and as soon as volunteer admins are overwhelmed with requests, they will have to automatically delete any post that they are notified about.

  All the power is on the side of the complainant. Nonprofit Lemmy hosts would go bankrupt in minutes trying to fight it.

  source
• gaspar_petersen@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  It works only for big tech. Small forums, for example, often can’t comply with such regulations.

  source
• MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I just don’t see how smaller social groups like forums or fedi stuff can survive if they need to potentially fight legal battles too.

  source