California’s age-appropriate social media design law (AB-2273) “is the most extensive attempt by any state to censor speech since the birth of the internet,” said NetChoice’s motion Friday (docket 5:22-cv-08861) for a preliminary injunction in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Jose to invalidate the statute. California’s response to the motion, which had been expected (see 2301310034), is due April 21. NetChoice’s reply brief is due May 19.
Section 230
Conservative and liberal Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical Tuesday that a social media platform's inaction in removing terrorist content amounts to aiding and abetting terror plots. The court heard oral argument in Gonzalez v. Google (docket 21-1333) (see 2301130028).
Roomster denies culpability for the fraud allegations brought by the FTC and five states to thwart the company's alleged proliferation of fake positive online reviews, said its answer to the complaint Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-07389) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York. The plaintiffs’ claims are barred because Roomster is “immune from liability” under Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act, it said. That’s notwithstanding U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon’s recent denial of Roomster’s motions for dismissal, to stay discovery and for a protective order in which she said Section 230 doesn't shield the company from its alleged violations of federal and state consumer protection laws (see 2302030034). The plaintiffs’ claims are barred in whole or in part because the consumers they purport to protect “have enjoyed the full benefit of their purchase of services and/or products” that are the subject of the complaint, said Roomster.
Decisions in the two interlinked cases involving the Communications Decency Act's Section 230 being argued before the Supreme Court next week could lead to many conflicts with state and international laws, force Congress to act, spawn waves of litigation or cause the cases to “dissolve like alka seltzer,” said legal and tech experts on a Brookings Institute virtual panel Tuesday on Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh. “I think it is correct this will be the most important Supreme Court decision about the Internet possibly ever,” said Alan Rozenshtein, associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota Law School.
The U.S. District Court for Southern New York should deny Jiakeshu Technology’s “misguided” motion to remand its petition to vacate an arbitration award to the same New York Superior Court from which Amazon removed it Nov. 29, said Amazon’s opposition Friday (docket 1:22-cv-10119).
A social media platform’s awareness of terrorist activity on the service doesn’t amount to aiding and abetting terror attacks (see 2301120061), Twitter argued Friday before the Supreme Court (docket 21-1496).
YouTube’s Partnership Program (YPP) “enabled, facilitated and profit-shared” in two adults’ predatory behaviors, enabling the identification and grooming of vulnerable children for illicit sexual purposes, alleged a Wednesday complaint (docket 5:23-cv-00091) against two YouTube channel users, the video platform and Google in U.S. District Court for Middle Florida in Ocala.
The Supreme Court should consider remanding a Communications Decency Act Section 230 case to the lower courts to determine if social media filtering is protected by the statute, petitioners argued Tuesday in Gonzalez v. Google (docket 21-1333) (see 2301200059).
U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon for Southern New York denied Roomster’s motions for dismissal, to stay discovery and for a protective order in a fraud case brought by the FTC and five states to thwart Roomster's proliferation of fake positive online reviews. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act doesn't shield Roomster from its alleged violations of federal and state consumer protection laws, said McMahon's decision and order Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-07389).
GoDaddy isn’t liable for a gambling service allegedly hijacking a domain name due to Communication Decency Act Section 230 immunity, a 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Friday (docket 21-16182).