Roundup of 2023 Entertainment Law Cases: Analysis SAG/AFTRA and WGA contracts, No Parody of Iconic Sneaker, AI Copyright Highlights China vs US law; SCOTUS Bad Spaniel and Warhol/Prince.
JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Section 230: A Springboard to a First Amendment Discussion
Trump vs. Twitter: The Feud Over Section 230 and Online Censorship
Subro Sense Podcast - Unpacking Product Claims Against Amazon
Waldman: Stop Immunizing Websites That Allow Harassment
In this second installment of our six-part series examining Section 230, the section of the 1996 Communications Decency Act (CDA) that immunizes online service providers from liability stemming from the publication and...more
On May 18, 2023, in Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh et al., the United States Supreme Court ruled against an Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (“ISIS”) attack victim’s family who sought to hold Twitter, and other social media...more
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Gonzalez v. Google, a high-stakes case appealed from the Ninth Circuit about the scope of protection Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act affords technology companies against...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case questioning whether “safe harbors” granted to the operators of online platforms apply to the algorithmic process that allowed recruiting messages from terrorist group ISIS to...more
Key Points - This September, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed AB 587 into law, establishing new transparency requirements for social media companies. The new requirements include publicly posting and submitting to the...more
Online platforms that allow users to post content face a constant choice: to remove or to not remove, to police or not to police. Shakespearean allusions aside, platforms generally want user engagement — to reach as many...more
In the past month, there have been some notable developments surrounding Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (“CDA” or “Section 230”) beyond the ongoing debate in Congress over the potential for legislative reform....more
Section 230(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act (codified at 47 U.S.C. § 230 (“Section 230”)) has long been credited for the boom of user generated content on the internet — the crux of social media that has driven the...more
A recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Lemmon v. Snap provides a reminder that while Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides broad immunity to the owners and operators of websites and mobile...more
What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know. It’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so. (Attributed (probably wrongly) to Mark Twain) - A funny thing happened to me on the way to this blog: I learned that what...more
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) is once again at the center of a major political debate, with momentum building for an overhaul of the statute that many view as having served a critical role in the rise of...more
In the current environment of reckoning for the societal power of Big Tech, one threat seems ever-present on the tongues of those who would cut these companies down to size. Enacting this threat is likely to have the opposite...more
Loeffler, Cotton Release Bill to Hold Tech Companies Accountable for Child Exploitation, Allow Victims to Sue - "It would amend the US code to strip Section 230 protections from tech companies." Why this is important:...more
The appetite for acquisitions and investment in online businesses has never been stronger, with many of the most attractive online opportunities being businesses that host, manage and leverage user-generated content. These...more
Assaults on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (the “CDA”)—which shields online platforms from civil liability for third party content on their services—are abundant these days. On October 15, 2020, FCC Chairman...more
Despite continued scrutiny over the legal immunity online providers enjoy under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), online platforms continue to successfully invoke its protections. This is illustrated by...more
In an interview with the editorial board of the New York Times, published today, former Vice President Joe Biden advocated for repeal of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). As readers of this blog may know,...more
On September 4, 2019, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission announced Google and YouTube will pay a record $170 million as part of a settlement over allegations that YouTube violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act...more
In the swirl of scrutiny surrounding the big Silicon Valley tech companies and with some in Congress declaiming that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) should be curtailed, 2019 has quietly been an important...more
In early July, an appeals court ruled that Amazon should be considered a “seller” of goods under Pennsylvania products liability law and subject to strict liability for consumer injuries caused by the defective goods sold on...more
Three recent court decisions reaffirm the expansive immunity awarded to online providers that host third-party content under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (“CDA”), 47 U.S.C. § 230(c): California’s Superior...more
As we have frequently noted on Socially Aware, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects social media sites and other online platforms from liability for user-generated content. Sometimes referred to as “the law...more
In the past few months, there have been a number of notable decisions affirming broad immunity under the Communications Decency Act (CDA), 47 U.S.C. §230(c), for online providers that host third party content. The beat goes...more
The Communications Decency Act has long shielded internet service providers from liability when they re-post fake news or fraudulent information from another provider. The federal statute says no interactive computer service...more
Three recent court decisions affirmed the robust immunity under the Communications Decency Act (CDA), 47 U.S.C. §230(c), for online providers that host third-party content: the Second Circuit’s decision in Herrick v. Grindr...more