Eh, we are talking about users posting and using the links, that's not advertising by another company.
There are -at least- two serious problems for Twitter with this new rule:
1) It contains a clause ("We recognize that certain social media platforms provide alternative experiences to Twitter, and allow users to post content to Twitter from these platforms. In general, any type of cross-posting to our platform is not in violation of this policy, even from the prohibited sites listed above.") that basically nullifies the "rule". This basically makes Twitter decide whether things are according to the law or not - not the judicative/executive.
It's like "Welcome to my house, once you are here I will decide whether you are a guest or a burglar.", and your behaviour has little, if any, influence on the decision.
2) Removing links to other webpages (as long as no laws are violated) would make Twitter an editorial media and no longer a social media platform - which would in turn mean that Twitter becomes liable for any illegal content.
August, to give you a chance of reconsidering your previous posting: the Communication Decency Act and it's Section 230, mentioned by Dargo, are actually US laws (47 U.S.C. §230), not European laws.
|