as long as you dont mention "democracy" in public you should be safe.

Is this a reference to me because that put a pit in my stomach.

no worries, i meant no reference here to anything/anyone specific(@AudioMatt: if you're worried about your "Granulocracy" thread, i wouldn't be, you worded everything there pretty nicely and i don't see that thread as having any danger of inflaming public opinion about anything over time, either), i just meant to help in general: i doubt anyone even need worry about it, just a heads up to remain alert /about possible changes around election time(and even though there's opposition to section230 from both sides of the election now(Biden has also expressed disgruntlement with 230 in the past), change/repeal will meet quite a bit of resistance no matter what - hopefully any change would be minimal and take quite a bit of time to implement/enforce as well). if you'd like a specific example of something i might be worried about, only after election time, should a sudden/drastic change happen: if a user-submission, or posts to the forums(more likely many posts/submissions following the same view), were to express something negative about a 3rd party(not cycling74, probably not ableton either since both are collaborative/cooperative businesses together), and that 3rd party felt this form of user-participation hindered their business or proved otherwise harmful in some way, especially if they could prove/spin the issue as not being based in fact, but rather spreading misinformation, they could hold cycling74 responsible for "condoning libel/slander" about them, or something similar, and could begin a litigation(this doesn't mean they'd even win, but litigation can be expensive to the unprepared in and of itself). so the onus might be on cycling74 to moderate more closely. if they did so, or change their terms of use, or even change the interface of this site so that you could only access certain types of content in a less public way(example: the Lines forums, using the 'discourse' interface for forums, has things set up so that certain more political threads are hidden from public view and user-logins must interact for a certain amount to achieve a certain loyalty-level before they have access to those threads), this shouldn't be seen as indicative of anything to do with cycling74's socio-political views, it would only be a move to protect themselves existing under that new regime...'scuse me.. did i say 'regime'? i meant 'legal environment' 😜😇

seriously, though, nothing to worry about too much for now, just trying to help everyone remain informed/alert/aware.

the actual state of the internet is the following: you can post inhuman racist shit and calls to murders and terrorist acts like you wish - but when you post your own music on youtube it gets deleted and they claim that you would have just sued yourself for copyright infringement.

the actual state of the world, on the other hand, is constantly lost in this pursuit for ownership over anything: Death is the final and insurmountable proof that you never even own the rights to your own life 👻

compared to the dangers you should be scared of(internet services are opening up to younger and younger clients to try and secure higher profits, and younger children will now need to know how to psychologically deal with and even 'flag' inappropriate content when they're the first ones to see it, even if their parents never knew nor did), this issue of copyright is actually quite petty, and there are just as many petty ways around it(that is, if you didn't sample without permission from someone else's music, in 'your' music, who's copyright you don't actually own), if you care about your own music and protecting your rights over it, try it: https://www.dmca.com/FAQ/What-is-a-DMCA-Counter-Notice

I'm folling in this topic but probably not going to comment other than to say that it irks me a little when people confuse/conflate social media with "The Internet."

agreed, Matt. your response is very wise and shows a greater understanding of the complexity involved:

Thanks. Remember that this is still the best tool for disseminating all the knowledge necessary to overcome the existential issues facing humanity and democracy. Your Facebook feed is a very small part of it.

"if you care about your own music and protecting your rights over it, try it:" why would you try that. :) if somebody claims your composition wouldnt be not yours, his whole system is nothing but a massive fraud machine and i wont waste my time argueing with his bots about it. if you think you must use "social media" or even do business there, then you have to deal with the consequences. i try to avoid it where i can. once you start sending out DMCA requests or counter notices you will soon end up reading hundreds of pages of "user regulations", "terms and conditions" and "terms of use" and spend the rest of your life conducting legal proceedings against phantoms. see where you guys are at already: you use this corporate stuff yourself - yet you speak out against it. :) and while it doesnt belong here (and should not be my business): the worst of all are those who follow rules or make rules for others without need - like ableton obviously does. a software company which deletes posts of their guests about software because they might contain conspirational political messages has failed on all levels - and it just doesnt make sense to hang around in such places and keep discussing on-topic, but only within their allowed parameters.

oh, and social media, torrent, and attacks like email spam IS 99% of "the internet". which is no wonder when you all use it.

not true at all. i'm actually here just trying to inform about a threat to the 'corporate stuff' of the cycling74 forums which might inevitably be influenced by all of this(i'm not here speaking out against any tech or corporations, not sure where you read that: the 'regime' i was referring to is the changing u.s. government. if you're here, on cycling74 forums, you're using this 'corporate stuff', too, and i'm here trying to protect your freedom in using it by giving you information on possible threats to it). it does seem too, by the quick/unintelligible and unfocused style of your writing here, you are having an emotional response rather than a reasonable one - you don't normally sound so emotional, Roman ;) sorry i got under your skin so easily, i was actually here to post the links above(in my very first post here, about section230) which elucidate why no one should jump to any conclusions about corporations(i've done quite the opposite of 'speaking out against corporate stuff'), since government legislation might force corporations to act contrary to the interests of the communities which revolve around them :) the removal/alteration of section230 poses a threat to freedom of speech and the dissemination of information all over any community-based form of public networking over the internet. please just remain aware of it by actually reading through the links i posted above in my op specific to section230. thank you for considering this carefully.