Court Enjoins Ohio’s Law Requiring Parental Approval for Children’s Social Media Accounts–NetChoice v. Yost
Ohio enacted a law, the “Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act,” Ohio Rev. Code § 1349.09. The law requires certain websites and services to obtain verifiable parental consent before children are allowed to register or create an account. The…
![Judge Goes Rogue and Rejects Snap's Section 230 Defense for [Reasons]--Neville v. Snap](https://blog.ericgoldman.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/IMG_8558-150x150.jpg)
Judge Goes Rogue and Rejects Snap’s Section 230 Defense for [Reasons]–Neville v. Snap
The plaintiffs are parents of Snapchat users who purchased fentanyl from other Snapchat users and suffered overdoses. They sued Snapchat for a wide ranges of tort claims. To get around the clear Section 230 barrier to those claims, the plaintiffs…
Grindr Defeats FOSTA Claim–Doe v. Grindr
This case (like many I’m covering nowadays) involves heartbreaking facts, but from a legal standpoint, it was never meritorious. Doe created a Grindr account at age 15 (Doe claimed he was 18). He matched with 4 men. “Doe met each…
2023 Quick Links: Section 230
[My Quick Links publication process is broken. Once-a-year postings aren’t very useful LOL.] * Palmer v. Savoy, 2021 N.C. Super. LEXIS 236 (N.C. Superior Ct. July 28, 2021). Snap qualified for Section 230 protection despite the plaintiffs’ invocation of the Lemmon design…
Many Fifth Circuit Judges Hope to Eviscerate Section 230–Doe v. Snap
I previously covered the district court ruling in this case. I summarized: A high school teacher allegedly used Snapchat to groom a sophomore student for a sexual relationship. (Atypically, the teacher was female and the victim was male, but the…
Twitter Defeats FOSTA Case Over CSAM–Doe v. Twitter
This is a FOSTA case. All FOSTA cases are very complicated. (Indeed, almost all of the opinion is spent explaining the background). If you’re new to FOSTA cases and you are baffled by the layers of inferences and arguments here,…
Advertiser Can’t Force Facebook to Run Sex Product Ads–Strachan v. Facebook
Strachan created various Facebook pages and an advertising account. “In April 2020, Facebook cancelled Strachan’s advertising account and removed his advertising content from the platform.” Allegedly, Facebook “determined he was selling ‘Adult Services and/or Products,’ i.e., ‘sex products.’” To make…
Plaintiffs Are Eager to Invoke the Texas Social Media Censorship Law, But Will They Have to Do So in California?
Plaintiffs CAN’T WAIT to sue Internet services using the Texas social media censorship law. Indeed, they are already filing lawsuits despite the pending Supreme Court appeal hanging over the law. But surprise! The plaintiffs may have to sue in California…
My Amicus Brief in Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton
In collaboration with superstar lawyer Michael Kwun, I submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court against the Florida and Texas social media censorship laws. I had previously filed an amicus brief supporting certiorari in the Florida case, and…
Section 230 Applies to Doxxing TikTok Video–Couture v. Noshirvan
The court summarizes the plaintiffs’ allegations: Defendant [Danesh] Noshirvan is a TikTok creator. He makes money through TikTok gifts, tips, and subscription fees. His niche is cancel culture. Noshirvan finds a video of someone messing up. He then edits and…