Amazon filed a petition with an EU court asking it to annul its designation as a “very large online platform” in the Digital Services Act.
I get where they’re coming from. Moderating a huge online presence where people can make posts about things is difficult and costly. But… It’s their platform and they’re in charge of it. So… It kinda sounds like they have to.
if an entire federation of volunteers can do it, a massive org like amazon can.
I get this to a certain extent. But if Amazon makes absolutely no effort to police its platforms, then it should be able to be sued for potential defamation, libel, etc. Amazon cannot have total immunity from responsibility. I am not a lawyer but I think there is a legal term for things like this called, “Best Effort.” I am more familiar with criminal law than civil law though.
I feel like, even on non-anonymous platforms, the onus is on a prosecutor to figure it out. Moderators should do their best effort but it is an impossible task. Would you hold a mail carrier liable for what they deliver?
Mail carriers, logistics companies, and couriers often X-ray contents for hazard or illegal materials.
A postcard would be the equivalent.
Letters are more like encrypted messages as you’re unable to read them.
i don’t think anyone is asking Amazon (or anyone) to do a perfect job-- that’s impossible. but platform owners should be responsible for making a reasonable effort to keep their spaces safe.
Amazon argues other large retailers weren’t given the same designation, but is that because Amazon is largest or because the other retailers are already doing a good enough job (in which case no harm in the EU agreeing to include more retailers in the list) or because EU arbitrarily wants Amazon in the list without proof it would make a difference (in which case maybe take another look at the criteria used to make the list).
Imo, it’s fair to ask why Alex Jones’ webstore shouldn’t also have to police disinformation they put out
