http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense ... fault.html
In terms of liability, I'm inclined to view facebook live like a car. If someone robs a bank and drives their F-150 into a crowd of people, I think its kind of absurd to blame that on Ford Motors.
I wonder how the discussion would be framed if the guy had his own radio station or something and was broadcasting the sounds of his victims dying?Facebook Live is attracting scrutiny because it lies near the extreme vanguard of this spectrum. It's real-time; anyone can use it at any moment; the medium of personal video is as intimate as it gets; and the potential audience for a popular stream is tremendous thanks to Facebook's algorithms. Its one advantage over Twitter, when it comes to moderation, is that accounts aren’t anonymous, which means that you can't use it with impunity. By broadcasting on Facebook, Stephens made it highly likely that he'll be caught, and in the meantime Facebook can deny him his page.
Its funny to me that in the age of TSA, DHS, and NSA, we still have no idea how to deal with these crazy fucks...
As screwed up as all these actions are, if someone is stupid enough to broadcast them, it might lead to their capture quicker as the authorities could look for details in the video to see where it is being streamed, as well as the ip address.Nowhere in the interview does he express serious concern about the possibility that someone might broadcast a murder, a suicide, a police shooting, a sexual assault, or an armed standoff. It's no surprise, then, that as each of these scenarios has transpired in just the first year of the product's existence, Facebook has appeared woefully unprepared to deal with them.
