Wherein The Copia Institute Tells The Eleventh Circuit That Florida's SB 7072 Law Violates Our Rights

from the sticking-it-to-everyone-to-stick-it-to-facebook dept

We’ve talked a lot about the Florida law SB 7072 that attempts to regulate social media platforms. In broad strokes, it tries to constrain how at least certain Internet platforms moderate their platforms by imposing specific requirements on them about how they must or may not do so. That law is now being challenged in court. The district court enjoined it, and Florida has now appealed to the Eleventh Circuit to have the injunction overturned. This week the Copia Institute joined others in filing amicus briefs in support of maintaining the injunction.

As we told the told the court, the Copia Institute wears two hats: One hat we wear is as commentators on the issues raised by the intersection of technology and civil liberties, which laws like Florida’s impact. Meanwhile, the other hat is the one we wear by sitting at this crossroads ourselves, particularly with respect to free speech.

To operate Techdirt, the Copia Institute needs robust First Amendment protection, and also Section 230 protection, to both convey our own expression and to engage with our readers, including in our comments section. Unfortunately the Florida law impermissibly targets both sets of rights. And this constitutional and statutory incursion affects every Internet platform, and all the user speech they facilitate, including us and ours, even if we don’t all fall directly into its crosshairs.

The Florida law’s enforcement crosshairs are especially arbitrary, ostensibly targeting companies with very high revenue, or very large audiences, unless, of course, they happen to also own a theme park… But one thing we told the court is that the specific details don’t really bear on the law’s overall constitutional and statutory defects. Part of the reason is because if Florida could pick these arbitrary criteria, which might not apply to certain platforms, another state could pass a law with different criteria that would reach more, and then these platforms would still be left having to cope with a fundamentally impermissible law.

Also, it’s not clear that even small entities like ours might not be able to attract the larger audiences the Florida law describes since that’s at the very heart of what we try to do as an enterprise: have reach and influence. The point of the First Amendment is to make it possible for outlets like ours to connect with readers – only thanks to laws like this, we could end up punished with onerous regulation we couldn’t possibly comply with should we succeed. And that sort of punitive deterrence to expression is not something the First Amendment, or even Section 230, permit.

But even if Techdirt could remain safe from the reach of a law like this, it would still hurt us if it hurt other platforms, because we need the help of other platforms to help our message get out too. Indeed, the whole point of the Florida law is ostensibly to help people use these other platforms to get their messages out. Only the upshot is that the law does the exact opposite by salting the regulatory earth so that no platform can safely exist to help users do that.

Filed Under: , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Wherein The Copia Institute Tells The Eleventh Circuit That Florida's SB 7072 Law Violates Our Rights”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
45 Comments
Anonymoussays:

Re: On another note:

If so, why do we even need overbearing and oppressive laws like Florida’s?

Because we should, nay MUST get punished for pointing out that they’re assholes no one wants to associate with.

So assholey that they’ve had to go make their own clubhouse. They didn’t feel safe in ours, because we’re both oppressive and sheeple at the same time. Making a clubhouse takes work. That cuts into the free time they have while not working, collecting disability, and any other excuse they have for realizing what ‘at-will’ employment means once it’s too late. And that work could otherwise be directed to us ‘Mericuns really want – libruls defeeted, soshullism defeeted, aborshuns gone (praise the lord!), and their fucking guns.

How can you plot a successful insurrection with an ignorant group of simpletons if you’ve got to divert the smart(?) ones to ‘compooter stuff’ like making a functional social media site that doesn’t suck? That’s what, a half dozen or so less guns to fight if us commie assholes come a knocking? Whaddif us sheep finally come for their guns while they’re farting around learning to code?

We created them. We made them create a space where their ideas could flourish, outside the oppressive cloud of ‘big tech’ and us commie, socialist, racist, atheist, anti-gun, straight on the fucking highway to hell libtard scum. Why wouldn’t they hate us for it?

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: On another note:

"Assholes no one wants to associate with" includes many activists who upset apple carts.

Martin Luther King could easily have been silenced, just as those who are ahead of their time today certainly are.

Might doesn’t make right and censorship is might. Immunizing libel is diastrous and will remain a disaster until 230 is gone. COVID is the latest fire to put out.

Rockysays:

Re: Re: Re: On another note:

"Assholes no one wants to associate with" includes many activists who upset apple carts.

Feel free to mention all these asshole activists and their message…

Martin Luther King could easily have been silenced, just as those who are ahead of their time today certainly are.

It’s funny you should mention MLK, he hadn’t access to an internet, he hadn’t access to mainstream media – yet he managed to get his message out even though the government tried to silence him and went after him in various ways.

At no point did MLK actually behave like an asshole, but those threatened by his message of equality – those where the assholes, and they certainly went to extraordinary lengths to silence him, up to and including assassination.

If MLK had been alive today, my opinion is that he would wholeheartedly support 230 for the simple reason it allows minorities and other marginalized groups to have a far stronger voice than without it.

Might doesn’t make right and censorship is might. Immunizing libel is diastrous and will remain a disaster until 230 is gone. COVID is the latest fire to put out.

Censorship? Please tell us who and what they said that have been censored, be specific. And do tell us also about this disaster, there must be millions of people affected if it’s considered to be a disaster…

In the end, that you can’t see the difference between an activist trying to change society to be better and an asshole being an asshole there is no real help for you.

Scary Devil Monasterysays:

Re: Re: Re: On another note:

"Martin Luther King could easily have been silenced, just as those who are ahead of their time today certainly are."

And yet he wasn’t. And by those very fine people you claim are "ahead of their time" I’m sure MLK would be the first to advocate having every private entity throw those people out of their houses.

"Might doesn’t make right and censorship is might. Immunizing libel is diastrous and will remain a disaster until 230 is gone."

And private property owners exercising their right to throw people off their property is not censorship. It’s the house owner showing you the door because they think you’re an asshole.

Just because you are a moron unable to understand this very simple difference doesn’t mean anyone else is, Baghdad Bob.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: On another note:

Martin Luther King could easily have been silenced, just as those who are ahead of their time today certainly are.

Ahead of their time as in, they’re the intersection of 1940’s Germany and the ignorant South – a bunch of red hat retards with a superiority complex, immersed in a pool of Dunning-Krueger.

Well, there’s no one able to silence them since they fucked off and built their own platforms to complain on, amirite? It’s gonna get real hard to keep playing the victim when you’ve got your own place to spew the ridiculous shit of the day. Perhaps they shouldn’t have based their entire ethos on perpetual victimhood.

sumgaisays:

Re:

No, Stephen, you targeted "communications", and that’s not their intent at all. Their intent is to poison any and all communications outlets, bringing the content of those media down to the lowest possible level of sewer-dom. You could say (and should have said) that this law, and comparable ones from other states, is intelligent conversation-hostile. The do want to see communications, but they want it to contain as little as possible intelligent conversation amongst the public.

Always remember, an informed public is dangerous to its government. The coroallary being, a split public, some portion of which has been informed by dis- and mis-information, is the best thing a government could wish for.

Remember too, that ancient Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times". We sure are living under that curse right now, aren’t we though.

ECAsays:

Re: Re:

you got some points on that Sumgai.
But can we add abit more.
In a capitalist system, every one wants their pennies.
If you arnt paying off the right groups, you arnt doing it right.
Its like the RIAA, and every Music box in every bar. There is a Fee for it. ANd you cant use your OWN machines. $2000 per month and you can only play this many songs, OR we increase the charge.

IF’ you took all the companies names in the USA and required them to use the Original Company owners names. There would probably be < 20 names for all the stores and restaurants, all the Washing machines and dryers, Everything would have <20 names for all of the stores and companies in this country.

Stephen T. Stonesays:

you targeted "communications", and that’s not their intent at all

Except it is. Communication is a two-way street; what these lawmakers want⁠—regardless of whether they’ll own up to it⁠—is to turn the Internet into a broadcast network, especially if that broadcasts their specific brand of lies.

ECAsays:

Communication and passing on information.

First way for Social interaction was passing word of mouth.
Which can get abit Garbled.
Then we had Basic paper, and walls to write on to pass on information into the future.
Then books
Newspapers
Then a Big change the printing press, to make it EASY to make more newspapers and books.
THEN we got Wired
Then Radio(these 2 may be reversed)^
Then we still had newspapers and News from around the world, Much quicker.
Then we installed radio(wide band communications on Phones) onto the Wired phone system.
Then we keep trying to get High speed communications for the Whole world.
Communication with the ability to show every Movie, TV series, News article, to have conversations and discussions from around the world. The ability to Share info and Thoughts from nation to nation, and person to person.

Insted of waiting for the news to get to you by Walking, by horse, by ship, by newsboy, by this and that and Any other way. You can now find the weather in Bangladesh, in seconds to see if they are going to have a flood, while you are sitting on the toilet. Insted of 2 months, 2 weeks, tomorrow.

Those nations that Declare they are free and open to the citizens of the nations, NOW can have that freedom of opinion, insted of being in the dark and only listening to those with the MOST money. But even then, as has been shown in the past, Corps and some, tend to create the business of Information control. You can have the BEST country in the world. But the control of Information is control of the people and the Gov.

Being able to hear/listen/see, HOW your nation communicates with each other, can tell a gov. MORE then anything about its people. Watch the information being spread. See what the people See and THINK they see.
Chastise those that make OPINIONS out of information/news. News is simple, and NOT glorified. IF you keep it to Facts.

Hope that all makes sense. My fingers cant keep up at times.

Anonymoussays:

To operate Techdirt, the Copia Institute needs robust First Amendment protection, and also Section 230 protection, to both convey our own expression and to engage with our readers, including in our comments section.

Isn’t the protection of section 230 limited to comments?

I am under the impression that any media’s own articles are not protected by section 230. (E.g., FOX is being sued for telling lies about certain voting machine companies).

Cathy Gellissays:

Re: Re:

230 protects platforms for liability arising from user-generated content. But the point the brief makes is that we need that protection both for when we’re the platform, hosting others’ user-generated content (such as in the comments), and also when we’re the user spreading our message via other platforms, or even hosting user communities on other platforms, which all need Section 230 in order to be available to us.

Scary Devil Monasterysays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

"You are definitely on the wrong side of history…"

The idea of being "on the wrong side of history" is, incidentally, normally only used politically for a certain type of people, ever since a certain Hitler popularized the expression in his book and in his speeches.

Because the idea that history has a right and a wrong side rather than simply being a recounting of fact…that’s an invention of that certain ideology Herr Hitler is famous for pioneering.

Scary Devil Monasterysays:

Re:

"Isn’t the protection of section 230 limited to comments?"

It is. comments are made by the commenters – not Techdirt’s responsibility what they say. No more so, at least, than the bar owner is culpable for what their patrons say in their bar.

Articles may be published by Techdirt staff (in which case TD would be partially or wholly culpable), or by independents (in which case TD would be partially or wholly culpable). Because in a sane legal paradigm it’s always the person writing a message who is responsible for it.

The alt-right’s slogan of "removing 230" basically means "Let’s shoot the messenger, for they are culpable for bearing the message".

Stephen T. Stonesays:

People need a truth-in-internet law

I have to wonder who would be the arbiter of what is true under such a law. Will it be you? Will it be the president? Will it be the 1989 Denver Broncos?

Would you have the police involved, such that they can arrest people for their speech? And what would the punishment be for lying on the Internet under this law⁠—a fine, a jail sentence, or worse?

You think you want this law, but were it made an actual law, you’d likely be in its crosshairs the moment it goes into effect. Sit with that thought for a while.

Anonymoussays:

Re:

Back already, John Smith?

Leonard French has done up a nice summary of what happens when copyright trolls refuse to pay their victims’ dues when the courts ask them to. Like Malibu Media. You might want to factor that into your press release that everyone knows is not going to happen.

At least try not to multipost while inebriated on your mobile phone so much. It’s excessively unbecoming behavior for a Hollywood titan like you claim to be.

Scary Devil Monasterysays:

Re:

"List everyone this fine institute takes money from."

It’s on the wiki pages for Copia.
Also in Copia’s homepage.
Also covered by numerous articles publicly released annually on where various think-tanks obtain funding.

Oh…I get it, Baghdad Bob…you thought you had yourself a ‘gotcha’ moment again and blurted out yet another question to which everyone can already supply the answer you weren’t looking for.

I must say your trolling has become rather weaksauce lately…but I guess when the material you got comes from the alt-right morons hitting all 14 points of Umberto Eco’s "how to spot a fascist" list the talking points just aren’t possible without either denying observable reality or abstaining from anything but a brief, limping one-liner.

Scary Devil Monasterysays:

Re: Re:

"Or is ‘just asking questions’ where your thought process ends?"

I’ll bet you a thousand bucks against a tub of bullshit that’s where that thought process does end in any of the forums old Baghdad Bob gets his talking points from.

This is why so many alt-right fsckwits deliver that line "Just look at.." and end up poleaxed when someone does look, finds nothing incriminating and asks the next question.
Whereupon they lose their shit completely and start screaming about being mistreated and silenced.
Because fact-checking, to the cult of anti-intellectualism, is outright bullying.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
15:51 [UPDATED]: Myanmar's Military Junta Sentences American Journalist To Eleven Years In Prison (8)
12:01 Hong Kong Government Now Directly Censoring Films In Hopes Of Shutting Down Protest-Related Documentaries (21)
10:50 Fifth Circuit Appeals Court Strips Immunity For Officers Who Arrested A Journalist For Asking Questions (16)
10:44 Why Falsely Claiming It's Illegal To Shout Fire In A Crowded Theater Distorts Any Conversation About Online Speech (85)
05:36 Massachusetts College Decides Criticizing The Chinese Government Is Hate Speech, Suspends Conservative Student Group (144)
16:07 Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment (28)
12:19 Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate (385)
11:03 LinkedIn (Mostly) Exits China, Citing Escalating Demands For Censorship (24)
12:10 Court Tells Arkansas Troopers That Muting Anti-Cop Terms On Its Facebook Page Violates The 1st Amendment (37)
13:43 Right-Wing Commentator Dan Bongino Runs Into Florida Anti-SLAPP Law, Now Owes Daily Beast $32,000 In Legal Fees (14)
20:41 North Carolina Sued By Flying Dog Brewery Over Regulatory Body Refusing To Allow Sales Due To 'Offensive' Label (19)
09:59 Now Josh Hawley Is Threatening Google Over 1st Amendment Protected Expression (44)
12:08 PETA Sues NIH And HHS Directors For Blocking Comments With 'PETA' And '#StopAnimalTesting' (59)
10:57 Appeals Court Says The First Amendment Protects Minnesota Woman's Right To Be Super-Shitty About Nearby Islamic School (68)
12:00 Elizabeth Warren Threatens Amazon For Selling Books Containing Misinformation; Perhaps Forgetting The 1st Amendment (49)
09:26 8th Circuit's Bizarre Ruling In Devin Nunes' SLAPP Suit Against Reporter Ryan Lizza (13)
10:43 Satire Site Gets Ridiculous Threat Letter From Baseball Team; cc's Barbra Streisand In Its Response (20)
12:12 Commentator Insists That Fact Checking Is An Attack On Free Speech (163)
13:34 Court: Just Because An Anonymous Yelp Reviewer Is Mean, Doesn't Mean You Get To Unmask The Reviewer (26)
12:06 Computer Repair Shop Owner Has To Pay Twitter's Legal Fees Over Bogus SLAPP Suit Regarding Hunter Biden's Laptop (108)
13:36 Report Shows DOJ Engaged In Selective Prosecution To Maximize Punishment For 'Black Lives Matter' Protesters (22)
16:02 Appeals Court Shuts Down Kansas' 30-Year-Old Ag Gag Law (23)
13:39 Ninth Circuit Affirms MSNBC's Anti-SLAPP Motion Against OAN Network's Bullshit Defamation Lawsuit (102)
10:51 Appeals Court Says Iowa's Ag-Gag Law Is About 50 Percent Constitutional (15)
13:45 Nassau County Executive Vetoes Bill That Would Punish People For Making Cops Feel Bad (15)
12:24 Shiva Ayyadurai Drops His Potentially Interesting Lawsuit About Massachusetts Officials Complaining To Twitter About Tweets (33)
12:03 President Of France Sues Citizen Over Billboard Comparing Macron To Hitler (20)
10:44 Top German Court Says Facebook Must Inform Users About Deleting Their Posts Or Suspending Their Account, Explain Why, And Allow Them To Respond (17)
10:44 Superior Court Dumps BS Charges Brought Against New Jersey Homeowner For Her 'Fuck Biden' Signs (20)
03:27 Appeals Court Denies Immunity To University Officials Who Apparently Banned A Christian Student Group Just Because They Didn't Like It (33)
More arrow
This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it