Ainin

Law Twitter reply guy account, not a lawyer

"As a matter of law, the house is haunted." Stambovsky v. Ackley, 572 N.Y.S.2d 672 (App. Div. 1991).

[Ainin @notinconsistent]

@ChuckleHutVIP @ScottPiepho @USConst_Amend_I The 1A issue has nothing to do with s230 preemption. It would still conflict because it treats the ISP as speaker rather than distributor. 230 preempts any state law claim against an ISP for hosting third party content. See, Corbis v. Amazon, 351 F.Supp.2d 1090 (WD Wash 2004).