> Third, the Ninth and Second Circuits erred in holding that section 230(c)(1) protects a defendant if it sends to a user content which the user did not actuall

> Third, the Ninth and Second Circuits erred in holding that section 230(c)(1) protects a defendant if it sends to a user content which the user did not actually request. A defendant is acting as the provider of an “interactive computer service,” and thus within the scope of section 230(c)(1), when it is providing “access...to a computer server.” A computer functions as a “server,” as that term is used in section 230, only when it is providing to a user a file (such as text, or a video), which the user has actually requested, or is performing other tasks (such as a search) at the request of the user. I don't even see how that's relevant. When I open youtube, I'm requesting recommendations. It's like a search, except I'm not searching for anything on a specific topic, but just for things that will interest me. (Some search engines, like HN's, allow an empty search, which in HN's case just shows all posts sorted by score[1]. Think of recommendations as a personalized empty search.) [1]: https://hn.algolia.com/?q= https://hn.algolia.com/?q=