The Possible Redundancy of §230

Authors

Brian L. Frye, University of Kentucky College of LawFollow

Abstract

Both fans and foes of Zeran v. America Online, Inc. (4th Cir. 1997) assume that its interpretation of §230 changed the scope of liability for ISPs under the common law republication rule. Many commentators believe Zeran “saved the internet” by enabling ISPs to permit unfiltered speech. But others argue Zeran misinterpreted §230, which was intended to encourage ISPs to filter speech. I think Zeran reached the right result, whatever Congress intended §230 to accomplish, because AOL wasn’t liable under the common law rule, either.

Document Type

Commentary

Publication Date

11-10-2017

11-22-2017

Notes/Citation Information

Brian L. Frye, The Possible Redundancy of §230, The Recorder (Nov. 10, 2017), https://www.law.com/therecorder/sites/therecorder/2017/11/10/the-possible-redundancy-of-§230/?slreturn=20171014161950. [http://perma.cc/FUW5-UHFB]

Repository Citation

Frye, Brian L., "The Possible Redundancy of §230" (2017). Law Faculty Popular Media. 40.
https://uknowledge.uky.edu/law_facpub_pop/40