<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/7/2019 10:50 AM, Tony Patti wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:SN6PR05MB4848B9B68FE908DF90865118D3D40@SN6PR05MB4848.namprd05.prod.outlook.com">
<p class="MsoNormal">FYI, <i>Bloomberg BusinessWeek</i> published
<u>TODAY</u> a 3,200-word article by Felix Gillette entitled<o:p></o:p><b><br>
"Section 230 Was Supposed to Make the Internet a Better Place.
It Failed"<o:p></o:p></b><a
href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-08-07/section-230-was-supposed-to-make-the-internet-a-better-place-it-failed"
moz-do-not-send="true"><br>
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-08-07/section-230-was-supposed-to-make-the-internet-a-better-place-it-failed</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
If the whole Section 230 gets deleted - and isn't carefully
replaced - then many DNSBLs and spam filters and spam filtering
technology providers with get sued out of business (even if just
by SLAPP lawsuits suddenly making more progress and costing a
fortune in attorney feeds). These costs will then get passed onto
consumers in the form of either MUCH WORSE spam filtering, or much
higher costs for email hosting services. The same is true for
Internet content filters, too.<br>
<br>
Be careful what you wish for, you might get it!<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Rob McEwen
</pre>
</body>
</html>