#Lawfare now has an analysis up on this: https://www.lawfareblog.com/supreme-court-punts-section-230

Pointing out that there are other cases that may force decisions in the future, but that aren't so weird or tied to anti-terrorism legislation. They may or may not be less scary for rulings, but at least they aren't tied into the morass of stuff that this decision could have been.

The #EFF has their own take as well: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/internet-dodges-censorship-supreme-court saying "The court’s refusal […] is a big relief."

#GonzalezVsGoogle #Sec230 #Google

Oh thank goodness. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/05/18/gonzalez-v-google-twitter-section-230-supreme-court/

No matter your particular views on Section 230 and on Google's responsibilities here, having the court and especially _this_ court rule on it was Not The Answer™. That was just a disaster waiting to happen.

Now Congress is completely inept, especially for the next two years at a minimum, but that _is_ the correct venue for _so so_ many reasons.

#GonzalezVsGoogle

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Google and Twitter regarding their respective court cases on Section 230 (Gonzalez vs. Google and Twitter Inc. vs Taamneh, respectively). Section 230 lives another day!

https://www.engadget.com/supreme-court-rules-in-twitter-and-youtubes-favor-in-terrorism-liability-cases-162246181.html

#GonzalezVsGoogle #TwitterVsTaamneh #Google #Twitter #SupremeCourt #Section230 #GonzalezVGoogle #TwitterVTaamneh

The narrow scope of immunity reading of #Section230 (c) is honestly the most interesting part of this whole #GonzalezVsGoogle argument. What was the intent of 230? To incentivize self regulation of content? I’m not going to shed a tear if YouTube gets kicked in the crotch for suggesting harmful videos. I'm just not sure how you carve out this seemingly reasonable goal of encouraging self-moderation, respecting the public commons, and punishing presentation of harmful information.

The Hill: Five things to know about the US #SupremeCourt case that could change the #Internet - https://thehill.com/policy/technology/3863606-five-things-to-know-about-the-supreme-court-case-that-could-change-the-internet/

#GonzalezVsGoogle #Section230

You can LISTEN LIVE *NOW* to the US #SupremeCourt oral arguments about #GonzalezVsGoogle and #Section230 at either:

C-SPAN: https://www.c-span.org/video/?525323-1/gonzalez-v-google-oral-argument

Supreme Court: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx

There are no cameras in the courtroom, so it's only live audio. The only advantage of C-SPAN is that they are showing names and images of *who* is speaking.

#Internet

@danyork @internetsociety The Gonzalez Vs Google case is considering whether algorithms are protected by Section 230. Platforms control their algorithms but take no responsibility for their algorithm's recommendations. I would happily give up some content discoverability if it meant ending dangerous and addictive recommendation engines. That's one of the reasons I use Mastodon

#GonzalezVsGoogle #Section230

Colleagues of mine at the @internetsociety who understand these legal issues far more than me filed an amicus brief in #GonzalezVsGoogle explaining why #Section230 is so important for the open #Internet.

You can read an overview of the Internet Society’s amicus brief at:

https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Quick-Overview-of-Amicus-Brief-Gonzalez-v-Google.pdf

and read the full brief at:

https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Internet-Society-Gonzalez-v-Google-Amicus-Brief.pdf

And yes, Section 230 is only a US law, and the Internet is of course global.

But even though this is a court case in the United States, the impact could be more global because so many of the largest services on the Internet are *based* in the USA. Google, Meta (with Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp), Amazon, Netflix, Microsoft, Apple.

If “recommendation algorithms” are not protected under Section 230, then this could open up so many new legal liability issues.

#Section230 #GonzalezVsGoogle

This week could be a pivotal week for the future of the #Internet. The US Supreme Court will be hearing oral arguments in #GonzalezVsGoogle. Will they uphold the liability protections of #Section230 for website operators? Or will they change the definitions?

@mmasnick has a great piece summarizing the issues: “Next Week, The Supreme Court Could Destroy Everything Good About The Internet “

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/17/next-week-the-supreme-court-could-destroy-everything-good-about-the-internet/

And also WaPo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/02/18/gonzalez-google-lawsuit-supreme-court/

tip @Techmeme