[–] 24041260? 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Exactly, good Samaritan protection for actions taken in good faith. Random banning people who violated no openly stated rule is clearly the act of a publisher curating content it disagrees with.
Twitter must stop acting in bad faith or it loses protections granted to platforms.
[–] 24041277? [S] 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago
How do you know they act in bad faith? Is the government now deciding who acts in bad faith? There's no random banning on Twitter. Only banning of bad people.
[–] 24041329? ago
Good faith actions require rules to be broken. You're not allowed to ban "bad people", that's a perfect example of bad faith.
If they didn't violate the stated terms of service, any action against then makes you a publisher, and you lose your special legal protections for it.
Twitter is now going to choose, instead of cheating by playing both sides.