this week, Gonzalez v. Google, challenges this law — namely whether tech companies are liable for the material posted on their platforms.
That legal phrase shields companies that can host trillions of messages from being sued into oblivion by anyone who feels wronged by something someone else has posted — whether their complaint is legitimate or not. That meant plaintiffs had to prove that bookstore owners knew they were selling obscene books, said Jeff Kosseff, the author of "The Twenty-Six Words That Created the Internet," a book about Section 230.
That didn’t sit well with politicians, who worried that outcome would discourage newly forming internet companies from moderating at all. And Section 230 was born. There are two possible outcomes. Platforms might get more cautious, as Craigslist did following the 2018 passage of a sex-trafficking law that carved out an exception to Section 230 for material that "promotes or facilitates prostitution." Craigslist quickly removed its "personals" section, which wasn’t intended to facilitate sex work, altogether. But the company didn’t want to take any chances.
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Google faces Supreme Court in case that could decide future of Section 230Open arguments before the nine justices are scheduled to begin on Tuesday. looks like the right-wing will finally get their FedSoc (federalist society) supreme court to destroy the internet, because of their fictious aggrieved feelings May that young woman and her family have Justice. Section 230 needs to be repealed. May that young woman and her family get the Justice they deserve. Get rid of Section 230. There is no reason for seditious ISIS material to reach our shores and be accessible under ANY circumstances.
Source: nypost - 🏆 91. / 67 Read more »
Supreme Court for first time casts doubt on Section 230, the legal shield for Big TechThe legal shield known as Section 230 launched Big Tech and was largely unchallenged in the Supreme Court — until now. Any attempt to overturn 230 is a violation of the first amendment. Finding for the plaintiff puts all kinds of people at risk. Terrorist rents truck, blows up something: are the builders of the roads he used liable how about the truck manufacturer, or the rental agency?
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »
Listen Live: Supreme Court\u0027s Section 230 case could reshape the 'fundamental architecture' of the internetYouTube's recommendations algorithm, and those used by platforms like TikTok, Facebook and Twitter, are at the heart of a legal dispute that's going to the Supreme Court. I work at Facebook doing content moderation algorithm coding. I’m sure the Supreme Court will affirm our right to protect the users from conservative hate speech!
Source: CBSNews - 🏆 87. / 68 Read more »
Supreme Court sounds wary of weakening Section 230 to allow lawsuits against internet giantsSupreme Court justices were wary of allowing lawsuits over algorithims that social media giants use to direct users to related content — even if that includes terrorism. they shouldn't be able to USE algorithms to Direct Users to any Content ... the END Sure, wary about holding companies financially accountable for the business model they choose to adopt just because it happens to result in people getting hurt or murdered Suits magats to allowed to spread whatever lies they prefer.
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »
What is Section 230, the rule that made the modern internet?A case coming before the U.S. Supreme Court this week, Gonzalez v. Google, challenges this law — namely whether tech companies are liable for the material posted on their platforms.
Source: wsfa12news - 🏆 338. / 59 Read more »