• KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    17 hours ago

    no because of sec 230 and publisher rights, they were still directly serving them before, the only difference now is that it’s tied into the video stream directly, rather than broken out as a second one.

    • irotsoma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      In the past they have always said that they aren’t transmitting the content and so it’s the responsibility of the transmitter of the data. Now the content at least appears to be coming from youtube not the advertisers. So I’m curious if that’s enough to make it fall under section 230 which would require that they make a good faith effort to remove “objectionable” content.