Unsourced material   Below material was tagged for needing sources for several months Feel free to reinsert the below material with appropriate references       classnavbox collapsible  styletextalign left border px solid silver margintop em   stylebackgroundcolor CFC  Impact       styleborder solid px silver padding px backgroundcolor white   Following the decision online service providers were much less likely to screen content created by users given the courts holding that exercising editorial control could create liability for the content of those posts In effect the ruling discouraged familyoriented or any sites from screening for offensive content The decision left service providers with difficult choices between simply accepting the legal liability for content they didnt themselves create or solicit restricting the speech of their customers such as filtering messages before making them visible to others or refraining from moderating even grossly inappropriate content which the Stratton court thought constituted editorial control  In  Congress effectively reversed this opinion via Section  of the Communications Decency Act  The legislative history specifically says the law was intended to overrule Stratton Oakmont and any other similar decisions which have treated providers and users as publishers or speakers of content that is not their own because they have restricted access to objectionable material