4 ms·

Don't social media companies have fairly broad immunity from user provided content under federal law?

shagie 3y ago
Section 230 - yes. That's federal law. State law with a private citizen action (see also Texas SB 8) for civil liabilities is a different thing. The way the law is crafted, it's not the state filing the lawsuits but rather private citizens and thus it complicates the ability for a company to sue the state (the normal way to invalidate a law). This is one of the laws that is coming into action that is designed to challenge section 230 in the courts. This is an attempt to get the 1997 supreme court that struck down parts of section 230 that criminalized transmission of obscene or indecent material to minors to be re-examined and undone. The fallout for this is social media companies that have porn as part of their service. It's easier for porn companies to comply with the law - but general social media companies that have "material considered harmful to minors" are squarely in the sights of the law and enables parents to sue those companies. Porn companies can just do wholesale IP range blocking and geolocation and make serious effort to comply with the law and block all of their content. Social media companies that contain content that is NSFW or NSFL will have much more of a challenge to comply with the law as they now also have to properly classify their content.
- fluidcruft 3y ago
  Seems like that has the same limitations the Texas law has then. i.e. no effect outside Virginia. Suing across state lines would require federal law to my understanding. I would think anything without a physical presence in Virginia can probably ignore it the same way abortion providers who do not practice in Texas are unaffected by the Texas law (presumably... I don't think the Supreme Court has considered those aspects of the Texas scheme at all yet).

Section 230 - yes. That's federal law. State law with a private citizen action (see also Texas SB 8) for civil liabilities is a different thing. The way the law is crafted, it's not the state filing the lawsuits but rather private citizens and thus it complicates the ability for a company to sue the state (the normal way to invalidate a law). This is one of the laws that is coming into action that is designed to challenge section 230 in the courts. This is an attempt to get the 1997 supreme court that struck down parts of section 230 that criminalized transmission of obscene or indecent material to minors to be re-examined and undone. The fallout for this is social media companies that have porn as part of their service. It's easier for porn companies to comply with the law - but general social media companies that have "material considered harmful to minors" are squarely in the sights of the law and enables parents to sue those companies. Porn companies can just do wholesale IP range blocking and geolocation and make serious effort to comply with the law and block all of their content. Social media companies that contain content that is NSFW or NSFL will have much more of a challenge to comply with the law as they now also have to properly classify their content.

fluidcruft 3y ago
Seems like that has the same limitations the Texas law has then. i.e. no effect outside Virginia. Suing across state lines would require federal law to my understanding. I would think anything without a physical presence in Virginia can probably ignore it the same way abortion providers who do not practice in Texas are unaffected by the Texas law (presumably... I don't think the Supreme Court has considered those aspects of the Texas scheme at all yet).