Gentle Reminder: There can be no open accusations of fakes from other retailers/ FB groups.

El Presidente · September 27, 2023

Gentle Reminder: There can be no accusations of fakes from other retailers/groups.

The Mod Squad had to take down a fairly targetted thread this evening in relation to "alleged" fakes on other sties/platforms.

Let's cut to the chase. There are plenty of fakes being traded/sold everywhere. If you ever want a no hold barred discussion, jump on a FOH Zoom session.

So let me address the question as to why we can't discuss it openly here.

Simply, we have no "section 230" protection.

What is section 230? It is a unique US protection.

In brief.

The law that provides protection to social media companies (and other online platforms) against certain types of litigation related to user-generated content is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, often referred to simply as "Section 230."

Section 230 is a critical piece of legislation that shields online platforms from being treated as the publisher or speaker of content posted by their users. Here are some key provisions and protections provided by Section 230:

No Liability for User-Generated Content: Online platforms are not held legally responsible for the content posted by their users. This means that if a user posts defamatory, obscene, or harmful content, the platform itself cannot be sued for it.

Good Samaritan Provision: Section 230 also includes a "Good Samaritan" clause, which grants platforms the ability to moderate and remove content they deem objectionable without being liable for the content they leave up or the content they take down in good faith. This provision encourages platforms to engage in content moderation efforts to maintain a safe and welcoming environment for users.

Protection Against State Law Claims: The law explicitly states that it preempts any state laws that might hold platforms liable for content posted by users. This ensures a consistent standard across all states.

Section 230 has been essential for the growth of the internet and the development of social media platforms because it provides a degree of legal immunity, allowing platforms to host a wide range of user-generated content without fearing excessive legal liability. However, it has also been a subject of debate and discussion, particularly in recent years, as some argue that it may provide too much protection to platforms and limit accountability for harmful content.

The problem.

Section 230 does not apply in Oz or the rest of the world. Some countries/jurisdictions have similar laws, most don't.

What this means is that your post regarding XYZ site or facebook platform selling fakes leaves us liable to litigation. This has serious potential consequences. I end up in court (as owner of this platform) and if things go badly, Di can't buy any more shoes. This is bad....for me....very bad :lookaround:

Retailer Discussion

In an ideal world we could all openly discuss good and bad retailers. The problem is that not all consumers are knowledgeable. As I posted openly last week, I was accused of selling fake boxes of Ramon Allones Small Club Coronas and a box of Bolivar Petit Corona. The accuser wouldn't know a genuine Ramon Allones Small Club Corona from his pecker but it doesn't stop allegations being spread far and wide. I have thicker skin than an elephant so it doesn't bother me. However the same imbecile posting here about a legitimate box bought on XYZ site/Facebook group may prove a serious problem......not for him...but for me. That is the reason folks why we don't permit such discussions.

I hope that clears the situation up.