(obviously, it's both)

And as 30+ DSA scholars and I explained, while the DSA was abused by Thierry Breton to threaten to censor Trump, it isn't the censorship law Republicans have claimed: it requires mitigation of systemic risks only in ways that are content-agnostic husovec.eu/wp-content/u...

You say: the FTC "warned that certain DSA rules might conflict with American laws, particularly regarding freedom of expression and the security of United States citizens."

I debunked this claim here: techfreedom.org/wp-content/u...

something something Jim Jones, Jonestown...

Benz also attacks @daphnek.bsky.social (director of Stanford's Program on Platform Regulation). No US scholar has done more to ensure that platform regulation ISN'T used for censorship, as would be obvious to anyone whose grift isn't milking the "censorship industrial complex" narrative for 💰

We also sent a letter to Commissioner Henna Virkkunen, Breton's successor, urging that the DSA's red line (which rests on well-established principles of EU law) be made explicit in the DSA, or failing that, by the Commission, which she was quick to do
husovec.eu/wp-content/u...

Our letter debunked the central claim of the House Judiciary Committee Republicans' report on "EU censorship," so of course Republicans have simply ignored it.

No European academic has done more than Martin to ensure that the DSA is NOT used for censorship. Yet now Mike Benz portrays Martin as the chief architect of Europe's "censorship law." Nonsense.

30+ DSA scholars joined our letter, which clearly condemned Breton for his abuse of the law and, more generally,"the kind of jawboning Commissioner Breton attempted to engage in." husovec.eu/wp-content/u...

In September, LSE Prof Martin Husovec (@hutko.bsky.social), the top DSA expert, and I led letter explaining why the DSA can't be used to require moderation of lawful content that politicians don't like. Our letter to the House Judiciary Committee summarizes what Martin calls the DSA's Red Line

The requirement that top management be directly involved is why the Biden FCC dismissed a petition to deny renewal of a Fox station's license over claims made about Dominion Voting Systems (which a trial court found false): the cable channel was responsible for those claims, not the the broadcaster

This 2001 law review article defines the key elements of the News Distortion Policy based on an exhaustive study of the FCC's application of the policy since 1969 scholarcommons.scu.edu/cgi/viewcont...