I was interviewed by Protos about the ongoing Bitcoin node debate between Core and Knots.
Though I’m not a lawyer, I know enough about Section 230 and existing judicial precedent that Bitcoin noderunners aren’t liable for what’s on the blockchain:
Bitcoin Policy Institute Fellow and Consumer Choice Center Deputy Director, Yaël Ossowski
According to Ossowski, “The amateur legal theory dogmatically espoused by a certain swathe of Bitcoiners about illegal content on the blockchain serves more as a justification for filtering than reasonable legal analysis.”
He continued, “Most people can understand the fringe case or attack vector, but it looks like a solution in search of a problem rather than the other way around.
“Specifically, it comes down to liability. Would nodes that verify, copy, and relay transaction data and blocks be liable for everything written and stored on that data set?”
In Ossowski’s view, if there’s any legal precedent or status that should guide us, it’s Section 230, and any blockchain could be considered an “interactive computer service.”
Therefore, he said, any noderunner wouldn’t legally be responsible for content generated by others.
“That’s a pretty easy case to make,” explained Ossowski. “No credible legal authority is seriously considering attaching liability to the automatic process our nodes undertake when dealing with Bitcoin.
“Some legal experts have discussed equating blockchains with piracy or peer-to-peer file sharing, but even that isn’t technologically similar enough to how Bitcoin nodes work and operate.”