this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)

Technology

59569 readers
4136 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

YouTube and Reddit are sued for allegedly enabling the racist mass shooting in Buffalo that left 10 dead::The complementary lawsuits claim that the massacre in 2022 was made possible by tech giants, a local gun shop, and the gunman’s parents.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dublet@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only person liable here is the shooter.

On the very specific point of liability, while the shooter is the specific person that pulled the trigger, is there no liability for those that radicalised the person into turning into a shooter? If I was selling foodstuffs that poisoned people I'd be held to account by various regulatory bodies, yet pushing out material to poison people's minds goes for the most part unpunished. If a preacher at a local religious centre was advocating terrorism, they'd face charges.

The UK government has a whole ream of context about this: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/97976/prevent-strategy-review.pdf

Google's "common carrier" type of defence takes you only so far, as it's not a purely neutral party in terms, as it "recommends", not merely "delivers results", as @joe points out. That recommendation should come with some editorial responsibility.

[–] Kinglink@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is more akin to if you sold a fatty food in a supermarket and someone died from being overweight.

Radicalizing someone to do this isn't a crime. Freedom of speech isn't absolute but unless someone gives them actual orders it would still be protected.

Don't apply UK's lack of freedom of speech in American courts.

[–] trite_kitten@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

This is more akin to if you sold a fatty food in a supermarket and someone died from being overweight.

No. It's actually more akin to someone designing a supermarket that made it near impossible for a fat person to find healthy food and heavily discounted fatty foods and someone died from being overweight.