ASPEN, Colo. -- Seeking a national conversation on resolving what some feel are tech's harms, the head of MPAA said that without compromise from internet companies, another option is tweaking laws that let them avoid liability in some situations for what's on their platforms. He said such a change could require additional "proactive steps" for such liability protections. "One of the most vibrant and interconnected human ecosystems in history" is "in serious jeopardy," CEO Charlie Rivkin said of the internet. At a Technology Policy Institute event Monday, he sought "a declaration of accountability for cyberspace." Speaking on the following panel, a representative from Google pushed back on such criticism while saying his company is taking privacy seriously and is eyeing further privacy safeguards.
Section 230
A dismissed third amended complaint against Google for its YouTube service allegedly providing material support for ISIS leaves the door open for yet one more amended complaint on one theory, but when that theory "inevitably fails," the next step is perhaps "almost-certainly-futile appeal," Santa Clara University Director-High Tech Law Institute Professor Eric Goldman blogged Monday. Goldman said the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision earlier this year in Fields vs. Twitter was clear that social media providers aren't proximate causes of terrorist-related injuries, so the YouTube suit didn't overcome that standard. He said the claim YouTube shares revenue with terrorists "clearly has no chance," and the entire subset of litigation going up against Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act -- which makes immune interactive computer services that publish third-party users' content -- "will fade away." In the docket 16-cv-03282-DMR decision (in Pacer) last week, Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu said the revenue sharing claims -- the revenue coming from YouTube advertising -- also don't support the proximate causation finding under the Fields standard. She said the other claims were being dismissed with prejudice, but she couldn't conclude that further amendment of revenue sharing claims would be futile and said the plaintiffs can file a fourth amended complaint. The plaintiffs -- surviving family members of a woman killed in November 2015 terrorist attack in Paris by ISIS-associated terrorists -- allege that because ISIS used YouTube as a recruitment tool, the platform knowingly provided material support to the terror group.
Yelp can't be forced to remove critical third-party reviews, the California Supreme Court ruled 4-3 Monday, reversing a prior Court of Appeals decision. The case stems from a 2014 lawsuit from attorney Dawn Hassell, who claimed her former client, Ava Bird, defamed her through two negative Yelp reviews. Because Bird didn't show up for court proceedings, Hassell won, and the company was ordered to remove the posts. The Court of Appeals agreed. The state high court said that court “adopted too narrow a construction of” Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and setting such a precedent “could interfere with and undermine the viability of an online platform.” The lower court improperly treated Yelp as “the publisher or speaker of . . . information provided by another information content provider,” the majority opinion said. Yelp Deputy General Counsel Aaron Schur wrote that the suit “threatened the rights of online platforms that allow people to freely share their thoughts and the billions of people that do" that. "We are disappointed in the Court’s plurality opinion, which construes the reach of the Communications Decency Act beyond its intended scope and stands as an invitation to spread falsehoods on the internet without consequence," Hassell's attorney Monique Olivier emailed, saying her client is considering all legal options, including review by the Supreme Court.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals shouldn't let Grindr use Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as a shield in a case brought by a man claiming he was impersonated on the gay dating app and harassed, said Consumer Watchdog Thursday. “Other court circuits have misconstrued Section 230 immunity too broadly,” CW said, allowing all kinds of internet service providers to “avoid legal liability, never being held responsible for material on their platforms.”
With anti-sex trafficking legislation signed into law, tech groups are ready to oppose further legislative efforts that might weaken liability protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, an industry representative told us. Proponents of the recently passed bill said this is the start of a larger conversation about online platforms’ responsibilities to the public on privacy, propaganda and criminal behavior.
Republicans aren't ready to “pull the trigger” on social media privacy legislation, Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, told us. But Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., believes GOP lawmakers will support a bipartisan bill he recently floated with Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. (see 1804240046), the Social Media Privacy Protection and Consumer Rights Act (S-2728). “I’m not ready to turn Facebook into a regulated utility or even agree to any regulation at this point, but I do think there’s a lot of concern,” Cornyn said. “We’re going to have to sort it out, but it’s not just Facebook.” All platforms mining for data with monetary incentives deserve attention, he said.
Negotiators of the North American Free Trade Agreement should include Section 230-modeled protections for online intermediaries to encourage free speech and foster startup efforts, TechFreedom said Friday of a letter it sent with many tech groups and associations. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides liability protection for online hosts and moderators of user-generated content. “Without those protections, even the biggest tech companies would be discouraged from empowering their users to speak freely,” TechFreedom founder Berin Szoka said. “But for startups, the potential liability would be fatal.” Others signing the letter to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and leaders from Mexico and Canada include the Center for Democracy and Technology and Internet Association.
Facebook won't appear Thursday at the House Judiciary Committee’s hearing on social media filtering, despite an invitation from concerned committee lawmakers from both parties (see 1804200049). Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., told us he wants to better understand how Twitter decided to block a political video from House Communications Chairman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., this fall. He voiced concern that other networks are censoring users over political differences: “Facebook is a leftist organization -- Twitter, Google. These are all [Democrat]-founded and Democrat-leaning, and it doesn’t mean that they’re absolutely unfair by any means, but they clearly have a preference.”
DOJ filed a federal indictment against Backpage.com owners, executives and employees on Monday, which drew praise from Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, author of recently passed anti-sex trafficking legislation. DOJ’s seizure of Backpage is proof that the legislation is needed, lawmakers said last week, while one critic argued it proves current law is working. The Senate passed the SESTA-FOSTA (the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers-Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking) package last month (see 1803210064), and Portman expects President Donald Trump to sign the legislation this week. “This bipartisan measure will make it easier to hold online sex traffickers accountable,” Portman said, calling DOJ’s seizure good news for victims and survivors of online sex trafficking. Co-sponsor Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said police “need this bill to enable them to take swift action against websites that knowingly facilitate sex trafficking of children online.” Meanwhile, TechFreedom argued that the seizure of Backpage proves law enforcement already has plenty of legal tools to pursue action against illicit actors and just needed to make it a priority. “Sex trafficking was exploited as an emotional pretext to chip away Section 230 immunity,” TechFreedom President Berin Szoka said, referring to a portion of the Communications Decency Act. Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley (R) said law enforcement will continue to find human sex traffickers and bring them to justice. Backpage unsuccessfully sued Hawley to block an investigation of the website.
Critics of the anti-sex trafficking legislation that passed the Senate Wednesday (see 1803210064) maintain it will result in broad censorship by websites seeking to avoid content-hosting liability, but proponents say the bill will have far-ranging, positive impacts for victims and families. Shortly after passage, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders released a statement of support from President Donald Trump: “The legislation empowers Federal, State, and local prosecutors to hold websites accountable for supporting the sale of sex trafficking victims.” Center for Democracy & Technology Director of Free Expression Emma Llansó said the new measure would drive sex trafficking activity offline or to foreign websites, while obstructing an open internet. Internet Association CEO Michael Beckerman called Communications Decency Act Section 230 a “key tool” for allowing Good Samaritan efforts to fight against trafficking: “IA will continue our work to preserve Section 230 and prevent attempts to weaken this crucial protection.” Consumer Watchdog praised passage. Privacy and Technology Project Director John Simpson called it “a chink in the Teflon of Google and Facebook’s shield of immunity.” The legislation “will have long range consequences not only for protection of individuals and families online, but also for a re-evaluation of these companies’ duties to police their platforms,” he said.