Search

Nohemi Gonzalez, a U.S. citizen and student studying in Paris, France, was murdered by terrorists in an ISIS attack on a Paris bistro. Gonzalez’s estate and family members sued Google, which owns YouTube, alleging that YouTube supported ISIS by recommending ISIS videos to YouTube users through its algorithm. Google moved to dismiss the case, arguing that it enjoys immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Meta Platforms Inc. plans to appeal court decisions that allow numerous states and school districts in the US to move forward with lawsuits alleging that social media apps are contributing to a mental health crisis among young people. The company intends to challenge rulings by a federal judge in California that denied its requests to dismiss the complaints. While some claims were narrowed in scope, the judge ruled that certain allegations are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields internet companies from certain lawsuits. [Extracted from the article]

The article reports on the victory of Google general counsel Halimah DeLaine Prado and her legal team in the U.S. Supreme Court case Gonzalez v. Google LLC which centers on Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. Topics include the immunity of online services from lawsuits related to content posted by their users under the Act, the court's decision to decline to weigh in the merits of Section 230 in the case, and highlights of Prado's career at Google as an African American lawyer.

(Bloomberg) -- A Republican National Committee lawsuit accusing Google of routing emails to Gmail users' spam folders was tossed out by a judge who said the internet giant fairly concluded they were unwanted messages. Even if the RNC complies with CAN-SPAM, Google may consider multiple marketing emails to be "objectionable", the judge said. [Extracted from the article]

In a related case, the court tossed out a lawsuit that said social media companies bore responsibility under an anti-terrorism law for a 2017 shooting in an Istanbul nightclub. Acting in a case involving Google, the court refused to limit the immunity internet companies have enjoyed under a decades-old law known as Section 230. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses the implications of the case of Gonzalez v. Google in the Supreme Court, which concerns the scope of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and Gonzalez v. Google, asks if Google is immune from lawsuits that claim the algorithms on its video platform, YouTube, aided terrorists by recommending Islamic State videos. It also mentions that Google has legal arguments, with experts Section 230 forbids holding platforms liable for presenting user-generated content.

The article discusses a lawsuit filed by the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, who was killed in a terrorist attack in Paris in 2015 on the U.S. Communications Decency Act. The family alleges that Google is in part responsible for the attack because its video-sharing site, YouTube, hosted content created by ISIS and recommended it to other users based on an algorithm designed to increase user engagement and time online, and lower courts ruled that Section 230 protected Google from liability.

(Bloomberg) -- Meta Platforms Inc., Microsoft Corp., Twitter Inc. and other tech firms came to Google's defense in a flurry of legal briefs filed Thursday in a Supreme Court case that could fundamentally change the way the internet works. But the companies - even Microsoft and Yelp Inc., typically Google's rivals - say narrowing the online speech liability shield could destroy their ability to serve up relevant recommendations to users. The tech companies are urging the Supreme Court justices to carefully approach Gonzalez v. Google, a case centered around whether online firms should be held liable for content they recommend to users. [Extracted from the article]

Microsoft and Google have been on opposite sides of several recent policy debates, especially a series of tech-focused antitrust bills that received bipartisan support last year. (Bloomberg) -- Microsoft Corp. came to Google's defense in a legal brief filed Thursday in a Supreme Court case that could shake the liability shield known as Section 230 that underpins much of the internet economy. [Extracted from the article]

(Bloomberg) -- Alphabet Inc.'s Google told the US Supreme Court in a filing Thursday that undercutting social media's legal protections could make the internet less safe and useful for its billions of users. "The internet would devolve into a disorganized mess and a litigation minefield", Google's lawyers wrote in the filing. [Extracted from the article]

The case challenges Google after YouTube's algorithm recommended videos about ISIS to users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(Bloomberg) -- The Supreme Court's decision to hear a case challenging a legal shield for social media platforms puts the justices in the middle of a politically fraught debate over whether some of the world's most powerful companies should be protected as neutral forums for speech or held accountable for the content. Google, Twitter and Meta declined to comment on the court's decision to take up the cases. [Extracted from the article]

(Bloomberg) -- The US Supreme Court will decide whether social media companies can be sued for hosting and recommending terrorist content, taking up two cases that challenge their liability protections. Two lower courts, including the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, sided with Google and said the lawsuit should be dismissed. [Extracted from the article]

(Bloomberg) -- The US Supreme Court will decide whether social media companies can be sued for hosting and recommending terrorist content, taking up two cases that challenge their liability protections. The cases mark the court's first test of the broad immunity social media companies have enjoyed under a provision known as Section 230, part of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. Two lower courts, including the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, sided with Google and said the lawsuit should be dismissed. [Extracted from the article]

The group, Lady Freethinker, sued last year, accusing Google of profiting from animal abuse videos by placing ads alongside of them. (Bloomberg) -- An animal rights group failed in a legal attempt to force Google to do more to keep videos of animal abuse off its YouTube streaming platform. [Extracted from the article]

FB, GOOGL, TWTR, BUSINESS, COS, GEN, GOV, INDUSTRIES, INTERNET, LAW, MED, NORTHAM, TEC, TMT, US, WORLD Keywords: FB; GOOGL; TWTR; BUSINESS; COS; GEN; GOV; INDUSTRIES; INTERNET; LAW; MED; NORTHAM; TEC; TMT; US; WORLD EN FB GOOGL TWTR BUSINESS COS GEN GOV INDUSTRIES INTERNET LAW MED NORTHAM TEC TMT US WORLD Facebook Inc. Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg supports reforming a decades-old U.S. law that limits social media companies' liability for content its users post online, while Google's Pichai remained averse to any changes to the legal shield. [Extracted from the article]

Thmoas wrote that theanti-terrorism law under which they sued Twitter did notprovide for liability in a case where Twitter had merelyprovided a platform ISIS used. News Section 230 remains unchanged with two narrow rulingsfrom the Supreme Court that find major tech players aren'tliable for harms created by user-created content In a pair of highly anticipated rulings handed downThursday, the US Supreme Court found that Google and Twittercould not be held liable under anti-terrorism laws forhosting content posted by terrorist groups. [Extracted from the article]

Trump and the Republican National Committee began blasting fundraising solicitations almost immediately, including one appeal seeking donations "to show your support for President Trump's lawsuit against Big Tech." (Bloomberg) -- Former President Donald Trump sued Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc., Alphabet Inc.'s Google and their chief executives, raising the stakes in his battle against social media giants who have blocked him. [Extracted from the article]

The banishment of Trump by major tech platforms reignited Republican calls to revoke the legal shield, arguing that it has enabled social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to censor conservative viewpoints. (Bloomberg) -- Former President Donald Trump sued Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc., Alphabet Inc.'s Google and their chief executives, raising the stakes in his battle against social media giants who have blocked him. [Extracted from the article]

The US Supreme Court today heard oral arguments from lawyers representing Google, the Department of Justice, and the family of a 23-year old woman killed in Paris by terrorists in 2015. Google's lawyer, Lisa Blatt, argued strenuously that algorithmically generated recommendations for content are covered by Section 230, and that the legal immunity provided by that law is a fundamental building block of the modern internet. [Extracted from the article]

Content-recommendation algorithms Gonzalez's family argues that that algorithms should be considered editorial content that is not protected against liability by Section 230, and so Google-owned YouTube violated the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) when its algorithms recommended ISIS-related content to users. A week after Google filed a defense brief to the US Supreme Court, warning that altering Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) would "upend the internet", a number of corporations --including Twitter, Meta and Microsoft, have filed their own legal briefs -- supporting Google's argument that narrowing the statute could have dire consequences for digital publishers. [Extracted from the article]

News In a case to be heard by the US Supreme Court, Googlesays that limiting Communications Decency Act protections forinternet companies from lawsuits about user-createdcontent would damage the internet as we know it In a defense brief filed to the US Supreme Court Thursday,Google warned that altering Section 230 of theCommunications Decency Act -- which protects internet-basedcompanies from being sued for content created by theirusers -- would "upend the internet." Google, in its brief, stated that YouTube abhors terrorismand has taken increasingly effective actions to removeterrorist and other potentially harmful content, and thatweakening Section 230 would make it harder to find andblock terrorism content. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses concern among the leadership of high technology firms such as Google and Facebook following actions by U.S. and European governments and court decisions that were eroding the legal protections and immunity enjoyed by such firms. The article references the U.S. legislation the Communications Decency Act (CDA) and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.