Platforms would be forced to either remove any content that could possibly be considered objectionable for fear of legal liability, or take the opposite approach and leave everything up, even dangerous content, platforms argued and targeting recommendation algorithms could result in content not being able to be sorted as users need. If the Supreme Court were to rule against tech companies in the Google case and issue a decision that narrowed Section 230, tech companies including Google, Meta, Twitter, Microsoft, Yelp, Reddit, Craigslist and Wikipedia warned in filings to the court that the results could be disastrous for the Internet. What impact the court’s ruling would have. “If you lose tomorrow, do we even have to reach the Section 230 question here?” Barrett asked attorney Eric Schnapper, who argued both cases against the tech companies. If the court dismisses the Twitter case heard Wednesday, it’s likely they’ll be able to throw out the Google case by extension without issuing a sweeping ruling on Section 230 that could have broader implications, Justice Amy Coney Barrett suggested Tuesday. The court will issue rulings in the two cases by the time its term wraps up in late June or early July. (The lawsuit does not accuse Twitter of helping any specific people who committed the terrorist attack.) “I’m struggling with how your complaint lines up” with the statute, Gorsuch told the attorney suing Twitter. Justice Neil Gorsuch suggested the case didn’t match up with the anti-terrorism statute, which suggests that people can only be held liable for aiding and abetting specific people who commit acts of terrorism, rather than general terrorism events. Other justices expressed more willingness to rule in Twitter’s favor in the case heard Wednesday, so it still remains to be seen exactly which way the court will rule.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |