• chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Safe harbour equivalent rules should apply, no? That is, the platforms should not be held liable as long as the platform does not permit for illegal activities on the platform, offer proper reporting mechanism, and documented workflows to investigate + act against reported activity.

    It feels like a slippery slope to arrest people on grounds of suspicion (until proven otherwise) of lack of moderation.

      • chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t know how they manage their platform — I don’t use it, so it’s irrelevant for me personally — was this proven anywhere in a court of law?

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Telegram does moderation of political content they don’t like.

      Also Telegram does have means to control whatever they want.

      And sometimes they also hide certain content from select regions.

      Thus - if they make such decisions, then apparently CP and such are in their interest. Maybe to collect information for blackmail by some special services (Durov went to France from Baku, and Azerbaijan is friendly with Israel, and Mossad is even suspected of being connected to Epstein operation), maybe just for profit.