They take websites offline if and only if they receive a legal order to do so.
Sites with user generated content have broad protections against illegal actions of their users unless they do one of a small handful of things that exposes them to liability, like actively participating or ignoring legitimate takedown requests. It’s not an accident. That’s how the internet is intended to work, and the only way allowing user generated content is realistically possible.
So why are they still servicing 4chan if 4chan has a bunch of illegal content on it?
They take websites offline if and only if they receive a legal order to do so.
Sites with user generated content have broad protections against illegal actions of their users unless they do one of a small handful of things that exposes them to liability, like actively participating or ignoring legitimate takedown requests. It’s not an accident. That’s how the internet is intended to work, and the only way allowing user generated content is realistically possible.
Same reason why they serve Lemmy instances despite illegal content on Lemmy: section 230 of the DMCA