CDA 230 Success Cases: WordPress.com

One of the largest hosts of third-party speech is the site WordPress.com. With over 38 million sites all over the world, the site has empowered users to speak their minds and comment on each other’s creative content.

We spoke with Paul Sieminski, General Counsel of Automattic, the owner of WordPress.com, about the importance of CDA 230 on free speech online.

via CDA 230 Success Cases: WordPress.com

9 thoughts on “CDA 230 Success Cases: WordPress.com

  1. It’s a pity that freedom of speech is so staunchly defended, while support for everyday common courtesy continues to diminish. It’s a situation guaranteed to make speech more toxic, and drive people even further apart.

    • I agree with your take on what’s happening particularly in America and online. I choose not to discuss American politics and believe me when I say that’s not because I’m ignorant. I’m very well versed in politics both below and above the 49th parallel, Mark. I have extremely strong opinions about the primitive thinkers – black and white thinkers, who beat their chests, proclaim freedom of speech, abuse others with fallacious arguments and worse, all while clutching their gonads (oops! meant guns, of course). Don’t push this button, Mark.

  2. When it comes to free speech, we’ve got it so good here in the USA. We need to stay vigilant to protect that right. Thanks to WP and EFF for all they do in that regard, and you for reminding me.

    P.S. Have enjoyed your beautiful holiday decor.

  3. Across the board, I think the general rule should be: Whoever wrote it should be liable for it. (Paul Sieminski)

    And that, tt, is exactly my view and, I have to tell you, it’s not a popular one, especially on platforms like Twitter.

    The problem, though, here in the UK, on Twitter, is that not only can the originator of a libellous tweet be sued, anyone who re-tweets it can be too. That’s dangerous, as on a very busy timeline – I get several tweets a second at busy times – it’s all too easy to RT the wrong tweet. Between the intention, and the mouseclick, an entirely different tweet can move under your cursors.

    Normally I spot that, delete the RT, chase down the right tweet and RT that. It’s very easy to miss, though, and accidentally RT a libellous tweet entirely innocently, so, folks, always ensure the tweet you actually RT is the one you intended – just in case.

    And if you have a follower who habitually libels people, think very seriously about blocking them. I’ve just had to do that.

    • I’m with you on responsibility and accountability. Thanks for bringing up the Twitter scenario as I’m pretty sure not everyone knows what you shared.

Comments are closed.