This would not be the first time that one of the big platforms has been duplicitous* in explaining their role as either platform or publisher depending which argument suits their immediate needs but I don't think I've ever seen extremely-high-buck lawyers say something like this in a legal filing.
Thanks to a friend for pointing this out.
First, some background. Texas Attorney General Paxton issued a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) to Twitter for information regarding their content moderation policies,
Twitter doesn't want to explain their moderation policies and sued Paxton in Federal Court (San Francisco) to halt his investigation. As part of their pleadings Twitter said:
The above is found on page 6 of the 19 page Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief.
(via Silicon Valley's own Santa Clara University)
As noted in the introduction, the platforms have argued they are a platform and that they are a publisher, whichever is most convenient, but a plain reading of the above, what with "editorial discretion" and "editorial judgements" seems to say point blank that Twitter is a publisher.
Which means they are not afforded any of the benefits of section 230.
Which means they can be held legally responsible for every piece of fake news and misinformation that their users post.
That is a lot of liability and it is hard to understand why the Wilmer Hale gunslingers would say such a thing.
For what it's worth the judge threw out Twitter's case and the Texas AG gets to go ahead with his investigation but the above remains on the record and might come back to bite the Jack-less TWTR somewhere down the road.
*Duplicitous via EtymologyOnline.com:
"deceptive, acting or speaking differently of the same thing at different times or to different persons," 1831; see duplicity + -ous.duplicity (n.)"deceptiveness, character or practice of speaking differently of the same thing or acting differently at different times or to different persons," early 15c., from Old French duplicite (13c.), from Late Latin duplicitatem (nominative duplicitas) "doubleness," in Medieval Latin "ambiguity," noun of quality from duplex (genitive duplicis) "twofold," from duo "two" (from PIE root *dwo- "two") + -plex, from PIE root *plek- "to plait." The notion is "a state of being double" in one's con
A fine old word that I learned as meaning "two-faced"
