About Protect Online Voices

“Section 230 is as important as the First Amendment to protecting individuals’ ability to speak and to access information online.” — Emma Llanso

“Literally every online platform that allows users to post information, share content, and comment relies on Section 230.” — Ali Sternburg

“Section 230 has been a cornerstone of the internet as we know it. Destroying this foundation could would put entrepreneurs of tomorrow on shaky ground, discouraging innovation and entrenching special interests.” — Casey Given, Executive Director

“By ensuring that responsibility for online speech lies with the speaker, Section 230 allows the Internet to thrive as an economic and cultural platform. This unique law is the reason American platforms are the global leaders communication, business and entertainment. Section 230 is especially important for small businesses and startups, who otherwise would face a barrage of nuisance lawsuits from all corners of the Internet.” — Michael Petricone

“Section 230 has enabled the growth of user-generated content, which in turn has empowered the conservative movement in the modern age. Section 230 plays a vital role in advancing speech and entrepreneurship in America today.” — Grace Morgan, Director of External Relations

“Without Section 230, I can’t say that Reddit would exist.” — Steve Huffman, CEO

“Section 230 has been beneficial by keeping the focus of responsibility for wrongdoing on the Internet on the wrongdoers.  Section 230 does not protect those who create harms on the Internet.  It protects persons and services, who get their information and material from others, from lawsuits and liabilities for relaying what others have said.  That includes, for example, individuals who might face lawsuits or liability merely for forwarding an email from someone else.  Without Section 230, every participant in the online ecosystem would face nuisance litigation and potential liabilities based on a failure to investigate and vouch for every statement by everyone else that they either relay or allow onto their service.”

“Section 230 has been instrumental to enabling free speech online for over 20 years. Understanding how it works, and why it matters, should be a prerequisite for any of today’s policy debates about content moderation, disinformation, or other online speech issues.” — Sharon Bradford Franklin

“More than virtually any other piece of legislation, Section 230 is directly responsible for facilitating the development of the Internet ecosystem we have today.” — Kate Tummarello

“Section 230 spurred new innovative services and fostered their growth, contributing to the Internet’s success. Virtually every waking hour of every day, we use online services that owe their existence to Section 230’s protections.” — Christian Dawson

“The reason Section 230 came into existence in the first place was to encourage tech companies in the early days of the web to remove objectionable content, with the promise that they wouldn’t be held liable if they happened to screw up in the process.”

“Section 230 preserves that individuals, not the tools they use, are legally responsible for harmful behavior online. Section 230 is not a shield for those who break the law online and the Department of Justice can still prosecute anyone who violates federal criminal law, whether on a website or not. As we’ve seen recently, European and Chinese standards of free speech are increasingly being adopted by American companies. From that standpoint, it’s more important than ever that Congress protect free speech. Eroding 230’s critical protections sets up a scenario where political powers dictate what is fair or unfair when it comes to free expression online. That should startle everyone.” — Billy Easley

“CDA 230 has important upsides, including benefits for online free expression and for innovation and competition against today’s incumbent Internet platforms.”

“Section 230 explicitly says, ‘No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information [by someone else].’ It is entirely intended to enable platforms to moderate.” — Neil Chilson

“Repealing or deeply undercutting Section 230 would most likely produce a stampede of litigation against tech platforms, which might respond, in part, by curtailing their openness to user content. One perverse result might be that the dominance of today’s players would be locked in.” — Jim Harper

“If you want to know why the Internet and e-commerce industries thrived here and stagnated in Europe, you don’t have to look much further than Section 230.” — Steve DelBianco, CEO

“Our vibrant online ecosystem exists because of Section 230 and the liability protections it affords to online platforms. It is the law that made today’s internet possible.”

“If the threat of punishing liability is increased, the chilling effect on the free exchange of views and information would likely be quite profound. Many site administrators would immediately start removing massive amounts of content to avoid liability.” — Adam Thierer

“Imagine a world where Yahoo, Google, or Facebook were liable for any violations or infringements that users post on their services…The internet that emerged would be nowhere near as free-wheeling and open as the internet we have today.” — Wayne T. Brough

“Everyone who thinks seriously about the issues implicated by Section 230 can—and should—agree that it has been instrumental in the birth and growth of the Internet as we know it—both the immense good and the unanticipated bad. Efforts to update Section 230 should not deny its past successes, ignore reasonable concerns, nor co-opt the process to score costly political points. It is incumbent upon those seeking reform to offer ideas and proposals that reflect the reality and the complexity of the world they seek to regulate.” — Bartlett Cleland

“Section 230 has made it safe for start-ups to develop innovative services without fear of crippling liability, and then grow into successful businesses employing thousands.” — Cathy Gellis

“Section 230 is one of the most important U.S. laws for the internet economy, and Congress should avoid weakening it.” — Daniel Castro

“The most important, yet often ignored, catalyst for the Internet’s incredible growth is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.” — Jesse Blumenthal

The Innovators Network Foundation is committed to research and the pursuit of innovative solutions for students and entrepreneurs around the world.  IN advises governments and educational institutions on technology and trends while partnering with non-profits and commercial innovators to explore solutions for the short (labor mobility), medium (infrastructure, education), and long (education) terms. – Jonathan Zuck

“Even if the larger internet companies can bear the burden of defending against a vastly increased number of prosecutions and lawsuits—and that’s by no means certain—it would be fatal for smaller companies and startups.”

“Section 230 is integral to protecting our human rights to freedom of expression and anonymity online in the United States and globally.” — Amie Stepanovich

“It would be good for [supporters of weakening Section 230] to engage seriously with the non-trivial objections that are meant to support freedom of expression online.”

“Nowhere in America has free speech thrived more in recent years than on the Internet. Members of Congress should resist trying to indirectly police speech practices they have no business regulating in the first place. Government intrusion on the Internet chills innovation and inevitably leads to unintended consequences.” — Andrew Langer, President

Weston Dombroski