Aren't the giants closer to the mob than a police force? I suppose those things are not terribly different in practice, but Google, Facebook, et al make money from leaving the scams on their ad networks.
Either way works - I'd still prefer the scammers to be liable and persecuted for their scamming than demanding that platforms enact censorship and policeing control.
3. Serves the scam to the consumer, ensuring they see it
4. Takes a cut of the action when the scam is successful
5. Tells the scammer how to optimize their campaign
6. Continues working with scammers after they're reported
The scammer has a fairly small part in the overall operation. The platform is doing almost all of the actual work perpetrating the scam. They're not remotely innocent here.
Disney is able to jackboot anyone violating their IP because the DMCA imposes liability on big tech companies if they do not comply with a valid request. The comment you initially replied to proposes imposing such liability for fraud also, which you appear to be adamantly opposed to.
Normally, if there is sufficient evidence, both the mob boss and the ground level gangster are liable and criminally responsible for their crimes. You are free to disagree, but I don't see any reason why big tech companies should be completely immune from any and all responsibility for facilitating and taking a cut of the criminal activity taken on their territory.
You are also free to call it censorship, but I am not aware of any jurisdiction where fraud is considered protected speech, so as far as I'm concerned, censor away baby.
