Quite a lot of things may or may not fall under that definition. Thats how the law works.

> And why would I have to accept an US jury's opinion?

Well, because they and judges are the ones empowered by the government monopoly on violence to judge the law and then have it be enforced, thats why.

Ignore the law at your own peril. But anyway, even if you did ignore the law, this doesn't have anything to do with you.

This is about companies immunity from prosecution. So, even if you disagree with the law, those companies are still immune under section 230, for good faith efforts to remove obscene content.

> Also you didn't define 'otherwise objectionable'.

It would be defined as whatever judges and juries define it as. I don't define it. Instead it is defined by those people.

> For example what I think

If you are not a judge or currently on a jury, then what you think is irrelevant.

The law is not computer code. Instead, it is interpreted by humans. And that is the case for basically all of law.