• njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    What legal issues are you suggesting here? Where’s the precedent for that? Supreme Court case after Supreme Court case have shown that websites cannot be held accountable for the comments of its users. A plain text quoting of an article would be extremely hard to tie to the administrators website. Much less anybody.

    This is just an extremely panicky response that has no basis in reality.

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Supreme Court case after Supreme Court case have shown that websites cannot be held accountable for the comments of its users.

      You’re thinking of Section 230, which doesn’t have a lot to do with copyright. This is more involving the DMCA.

    • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      One endpoint it could wind up at would be some outlets starting to send DMCA takedown notices to Lemmy instances in the US. That wouldn’t be ideal, and it probably wouldn’t start stop once it started, however much anybody tried to put the horse back in the barn at that point.

      Edit: Words are hard

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Every so often I get reminded that Lemmy puts me talking with people who have no idea what they’re talking about, and are just confidently making random statements that line up with what they want to be true at that moment.

          Yes, Virginia, online news articles are copyrighted.