![]() They add that Google does not have the capacity to screen “all third-party content for illegal or tortious material” and that the company was concerned that “the threat of liability could prompt sweeping restrictions on online activity.” In an opposition brief filed to the Supreme Court, Google maintained that a review of the case was not warranted because websites like YouTube could not be held liable as the “publisher or speaker” of the content users created. ![]() Court of Appeals for the 9th circuit sided with the district court, but in October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Because of this, the plaintiffs allege that these tech companies are directly liable for “committing acts of international terrorism” and secondarily liable for “conspiring with, and aiding and abetting, ISIS’s acts of international terrorism.”Ī federal district court in California dismissed the complaint, saying that Google could not be held responsible for content that was produced by ISIS. The lawsuit argues that this means that Google has not taken enough action to ensure ISIS remains off the platform. Plaintiffs also argued that Google placed paid advertisements on ISIS videos, which meant they shared ad revenue with the terrorist organization. The Gonzalez family first filed a suit in 2016, alleging that because Google, which owns YouTube, matches and suggests content to users based on their views, the platform recommended ISIS’s content to users, and enabled them to find other videos and accounts owned by ISIS. It also does not protect platforms that create illegal or harmful content.īecause popular sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube rely on user-generated content, many people have credited Section 230 for the creation of the internet we now know and love.Īs the scale of online platforms has drastically increased over time, with up to 368 million monthly active users on Twitter alone, experts argue that Section 230 helps protect companies that struggle to keep up with the amount of content posted on their platforms from being sued over what users say or do. ![]() ![]() Section 230, however, does not protect sites that violate federal criminal law, or intellectual property law. The law allows tech companies to moderate or remove content that is considered egregious. The law explicitly states, “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider,” meaning online platforms are not responsible for the content a user may post. Section 230, which passed in 1996, is a part of the Communications Decency Act. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |