Court Permanently Enjoins Ohio’s Segregate-and-Suppress/Parental Consent Law–NetChoice v. Yost
Ohio enacted a segregate-and-suppress law that requires regulated websites to obtain parental consent before minors can access certain site features. In early 2024, the court granted a preliminary injunction against the law going into effect. Borrowing heavily from its prior…
WeChat Defeats Account Termination Lawsuit–Sun v. WeChat
I’m blogging this otherwise unremarkable case for completeness. WeChat blocked Sun’s account in 2022, allegedly because Sun was discussing Chinese politics. Sun sued WeChat pro se for violating his civil rights (a 1983 claim). This is an easy dismissal. As…
TikTok Defeats Lawsuit Over User’s Suicide–Nasca v. Bytedance
The court summarizes: The plaintiffs commenced this action in connection with the death by suicide of 16 year old Chase Nasca on February 18, 2022 after he walked in front of a train. Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges twelve causes of action…
Arkansas’ Social Media Safety Act Permanently Enjoined—NetChoice v. Griffin
NetChoice challenged Arkansas Act 689 of 2023, the “Social Media Safety Act.” This is a segregate-and-suppress law: the law requires some social media platforms to age-authenticate all users and prevent minors from opening accounts without parental consent. The court preliminarily…
Why I Emphatically Oppose Online Age Verification Mandates
I’ve posted a new paper, “The “Segregate-and-Suppress” Approach to Regulating Child Safety Online.” If that phrase sounds familiar, it’s because I’ve been referencing this paper on the blog for months. The paper details my extensive and multi-dimensional criticisms of mandatory…
Facebook Defeats Armslist’s Account Termination Lawsuit–Armslist v. Facebook
In 2020, Facebook and Instagram terminated various Armslist-related accounts, and Facebook prevented users from sending the URL armslist.com in private messages. Armslist claims these actions were in response to government jawboning targeting Armslist. Armslist sued Facebook and Instagram, alleging that…
Section 230 Applies to Consumer Reporting Agencies (But Only Sometimes)–Foley v. IRBsearch
[A reminder that I don’t do April Fools gags.] This lawsuit is against IRBsearch, a data aggregator of public records and other material allegedly scraped from the web. The plaintiffs claim that IRBsearch provided erroneous reports that denied them employment…
Are You Ready for MAGA to Weaponize Anti-Doxxing Statutes?–Watts v. Daily Kos
Wikipedia describes Anthony Watts as “a climate change denial blogger” who “opposes the scientific consensus on climate change.” The Daily Kos published an article about Watts, “Heartland Fundraising For Tony Watts’ $2,000 Thermometers To Compete With Global Temp Network,” that…
First Amendment Doesn’t Apply to Descriptions of Content Moderation Practices–Bride v. Snap
Last year, the Ninth Circuit said that plaintiffs could get around Section 230 in their lawsuit against the app maker YOLO because the app maker said it would ban users for inappropriate statements and would unmask harassers. This opinion raised…
It’s Never the RICO–Loomer v. Zuckerberg
Loomer brought RICO claims against Facebook, Twitter, and Procter & Gamble, claiming they were all part of a “wide-ranging conspiracy…to unlawfully censor conservative voices and interfere with American elections.” The panel says wearily that “This action is Loomer’s fourth lawsuit…