Notices by Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social), page 8

Obviously, the world of online speech is incredibly consequential right now, but somehow doesn't get as deeply explored as other things happening in the world. We're hoping to change that. https://www.ctrlaltspeech.com/

There's a short teaser on the feed now explaining a bit about who we are and why we're doing this. I also wrote some more about it on Techdirt as well: https://www.techdirt.com/2024/03/07/announcing-ctrl-alt-speech-a-new-podcast-about-online-speech/

Cannot begin to tell you how excited I am to be teaming up with Ben Whitelaw from "Everything in Moderation" to launch a new podcast all about what's happening in the world of online speech. Ctrl-Alt-Speech. Subscribe now so you don't miss our first episode, coming out soon: https://www.ctrlaltspeech.com/

@quinn @DeanBaker13 this is why i keep suggesting Dean is an out of touch elitist in the ivory tower. Very much a "let them eat cake" attitude.

@Ulrich_the_Elder @alshafei you should block me then, as I will engage on some of those.

@crumbleneedy @DeanBaker13 also, the "bundlers" would immediately become the new gatekeepers, and way more powerful than the things Dean currently fears. Meaning... Meta, Google, Apple, and Microsoft would immediately take them over.

@DeanBaker13 i just want to point out how ridiculously out of touch and elitist you sound and then I am out of this conversation.

I would suggest you get some perspective.

@DeanBaker13 @rst they... can come here now too. why must the law deny them other sites?

@DeanBaker13 @rst also, you know why it would make those sites smaller? because people who aren't well off and privileged like yourself, won't be able to afford to subscribe.

Very progressive of you.

@DeanBaker13 @rst if that's your goal, why not just pass a law requiring fb/twitter to use subscriptions? or get broken up?

@mlippert yes. i made that point to them. I've had long discussions with people at all levels. doesn't matter.

@jjoelson @DeanBaker13 honestly, i rarely view it through the impact on me personally. but dean was insisting that there were no issues for smaller companies, so I was expressing my own example.

I have advocated for many things that I think are right, but which are bad for me at a business level (e.g., I'm against link taxes, which would make me money and I'm against paying to scrape, which would make me money).

@mlippert what they claimed was that even though the stitches were a very minor procedure (which they all admit), they also gave me a tetanus shot. They also admit *that* is a minor procedure. But their coding book says *two* minor procedures in an ER amounts to a MAJOR visit.

@DeanBaker13 already we get TONS of complaints. You say "oh you can just ignore the frivolous ones." You have no idea. Without 230, YOU CANNOT IGNORE THE FRIVOLOUS ONES because the FRIVOLOUS ONES TURN INTO LAWSUITS.

You ignored my earlier question: will you agree to pay my legal bills? These lawsuits each will cost in the low six figures just to get a dismissal.

@DeanBaker13 it's this dismissive attitude that just really gets to me. "Obviously you would have to destroy your business and make it untenable to continue, just to make sure the biggest tech companies have no more competition" is what I hear when you say stuff like that.

Please, Dean, I beg of you: TALK TO PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY RUN A BUSINESS impacted by these laws. Stop dismissing real people. You're advocating for a policy that will do serious harm.

@mlippert *after* they sent the bill to collections, without ever sending me the itemized bill, and then *after* I said I was taking them to court... they magically "retrieved" the bill from collections, and while I was talking to someone on the phone, she directly emailed me the itemized bill.

I then spent a couple months disputing the bill across 3 review boards... and was told the bill was correct each time.

@DeanBaker13 we get on average two dozen bogus defamation threats per year. I spend a ridiculous amount of money on lawyers dealing with them already.

If you put in your solution, that likely goes up an order of magnitude.

I'll make you a deal: will you agree to pay my legal bills and the legal bills of other small companies dealing with such things? If so, then we can discuss your proposal seriously.

@DeanBaker13 Part of the lawsuit was over comments. The judge ruled on 230 grounds.

@DeanBaker13 Dean, come on. Those who do not post defamatory information get sued ALL THE TIME. https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/06/judge-dismisses-techdirt-lawsuit/

And I was giving you one example to show how it would create problems, not saying "just my business" faces this issue.

I've said in the past that I've regretted interacting with you. This is why.

@david1 @DeanBaker13 @timjan @GreenFire if you're going to use that example, how about you talk about Veoh. Veoh was another competitor that actually got sued under the DMCA. And won.

But the cost of the lawsuit was too big and it shut down.

That's the future Dean seems to want.

https://www.techdirt.com/2013/03/15/veoh-wins-important-case-against-universal-music-over-dmca-safe-harbors-again-is-still-dead-due-to-legal-fees/