YouTube had the discretion to take down content that harmed users, judge said.

YouTube under no obligation to host anti-vaccine advocate’s videos, court says::YouTube had the discretion to take down content that harmed users, judge said.

  • OcelotEnglish
    35•1 year ago

    I don’t see how youtube or any private platform should have any obligation to host any kind of content legally.

    The problem with free speech is that if you want to have it you have to give it to everyone. Even the morons. And my god are the morons vocal, closed minded and opinionated.

    If you leave the videos up, it spreads misinformation. If you take them down, the morons cry censorship and spawn conspiracy theories gaining possibly even more traction. I personally think everyone is entitled to their opinion and should be able to speak freely, but the truth should drown out the lies.

    • FlumPHPEnglish
      22•1 year ago

      While I don’t disagree with the decision, I do think big tech companies are getting to have their cake and eat it too. They can simultaneously decline to host content, while also not being responsible for the content they do host.

      At the very least, I would like them to be responsible for content that was reported by users, reviewed by the company’s employees/contractors, and then allowed to stay up.