Comment by xorcist
3 months ago
There is a deluge of financial scams across all Meta platforms but also Twitter. A centralized platform have all the right to moderate content, but they must also be liable for obvious scams.
Either you are an open messenger like the postal service or an ISP. Or you own the platform. You cannot have it both ways.
I never understood why they all get away with doing nothing. Meta's own investigation showed 10%+ of all revenue is from outright scams, and all they do is charge the scammers a premium.
I have reported scams myself and have been completely stonewalled just like everyone else. They obviously earn a lot of money by looking the other way. That can't possibly be legal in any jurisdiction. Let's hope the Swedish justice system takes this seriously and sets an example for others.
>Either you are an open messenger like the postal service [...]
In what way is the postal service "open"? Sure, anyone can send a letter, but anyone can also create a facebook messenger account. If you want to do business with it (eg. sending bulk mail or delivering international mail), you still need to enter into a commercial agreement.
It's open in the sense that anyone can use it. Without restriction. And there's no way to be banned from it. Since anyone can just drop off an anonymous letter in the post. You don't have to enter a service agreement. Just dump you satchel of letters with stamps on them, in the nearest mail box.
It's not just practically open. It's legally open; at least here in Canada, the federal postal service has a legal obligation, arising from the constitutional right to free speech, to carry any mail that has legal content, regardless of how Canada Post or its employees might feel about it. They're obligated to take those commercial service agreements regardless of content. (This has been a point of contention sometimes with graphic anti-abortion flyers delivered as ad-mail.)
The main means to deal with someone abusing the postal system is the criminal law and court orders.
>It's open in the sense that anyone can use it. Without restriction. And there's no way to be banned from it. Since anyone can just drop off an anonymous letter in the post. You don't have to enter a service agreement. Just dump you satchel of letters with stamps on them, in the nearest mail box.
1. So this sounds like the section 230 debate all over again? eg. "Facebook can ban people from facebook messenger, so if they're not banning scammers they should be on the hook for it"?
2. What about ISPs? The internet might be open, but ISPs certainly aren't. People get banned for AUP violations or alleged copyright infringement all the time. If ISPs reserve the right to ban users for various ToS violations, should they be on the hook of scammers turned out to be using their connection?
Thinking about it I think I have received one scambait paper mail ever. Dunno why not more. Maybe the stamp makes it not profitable.
It's because mail fraud carries significant penalties, and the involvement of physical objects makes activity much more traceable.