4 ms·

Woaaah, this is really ridiculous. The Ninth Circuit thinks that not only are there "anti-competitive" exceptions to Section 230 (there aren't), but that Sectio

Woaaah, this is really ridiculous. The Ninth Circuit thinks that not only are there "anti-competitive" exceptions to Section 230 (there aren't), but that Section 230 applies to actions that a user-installed software takes on that users own computer?! How do I file a brief with the court too, to tell them how horribly wrong they are? This seems like a ham-fisted attempt to weaken Section 230 in any way that they can. This ruling opens the door for advertisers to sue authors of adblockers for blocking their ads, because it's "anti-competitive." Terrible, terrible, ruling.

rayiner 7y ago
> but that Section 230 applies to actions that a user-installed software takes on that users own computer?! Malwarebytes was the one trying to invoke Section 230's "safe harbor" for filtering software because it would immunize Malwarebytes even if its conduct was illegal under New York competition law. (And it would allow dismissing the case at an early stage, without resolving whether Malwarebytes' conduct was in fact legal.) If you're correct that Section 230 doesn't apply at all, then the result is the same as what the Ninth Circuit held: the claims against Malwarebytes can go forward.