By Hemaja Burud
How one Texas verdict might permanently alter the internet
Every person I talked to feels that the entire future of the internet's functionality is at risk.
This controversy has some ties to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which, although being a political hot potato, is quite explicit about websites' editorial responsibility.
In essence, it gives websites that host third-party material the option of choosing between an edgy, chaotic community or one that is family-friendly.
However, Section 230's protection of complete editorial control extends beyond the likes of Facebook and YouTube.
However, one perspective on content moderation is as a never-ending struggle for online communities, where bad actors are constantly one step ahead.
According to Novack, "many people think of the First Amendment in this positive manner, where it's about your right to express what you want to say."
Additionally, it involves your speech's surroundings, such as the material you wish to be connected with or avoid being associated with.
The phrasing of Judge Oldham's decision just makes the consequences more horrifying.
Such worries are, of course, real; they are a major worry for the content-moderation crew of any sizable platform.
In order to sustain the Texas legislation if the case goes to the Supreme Court, several of the judges would have to reverse their earlier decisions.