I wonder if there's even a reasonable way to delineate what should be regulated vs what should not. For traditional utilities, the line is pretty clear about who is providing me electricity. "Social media" and "cloud provider", however, are extremely vague terms. There are a few standout examples of what might count (FB, Twitter, ISPs), but there are innumerable examples of services that are clearly "social media" or a "cloud provider" but that clearly should not be subject to the burden of regulation. Maybe the distinction is as simple as userbase size, but that too seems like a too-crude distinction.
My solution is split services into “platforms” and “providers”, where only “platforms” enjoy immunity for user uploads but are subject to common carrier regulations in exchange.
It would be up to any company to decide if they’re a “platform” or “provider”.
Let people self-select if they view themselves as platforms or providers — with benefits and costs to each option.
Not everything should be a platform; I think companies like Twitter, FB, and YT would be happy to adopt platform/common carrier status if their immunity would otherwise be revoked.
Are there still edge cases? Yep.
But let’s not let perfect be the enemy of good — this change would improve the regulatory landscape in a way that helps end users.
