Amazon Isn’t Liable for Selling Suicide “Kits”—McCarthy v. Amazon
This case involves the tragic suicide of two teenagers, both of whom died by consuming sodium nitrite they purchased from a third-party Amazon merchant (Loudwolf). Sodium nitrite has several socially beneficial commercial uses, including being used (in small quantities) as…
Uh-Oh, the Ninth Circuit Is Messing Again With Its Roommates Ruling–Vargas v. Facebook
The Roommates.com case plays a critical role in the Ninth Circuit’s Section 230 jurisprudence. The (unnecessarily confusing) majority opinion suggested several exclusions to Section 230’s immunity, including these statements: “If you don’t encourage illegal content, or design your website to…
It Turns Out You Can’t “Sue the CDA”–Fyk v. US
Jason Fyk’s recent litigation campaign reminds me of the classic story Moby Dick, with Fyk in the Captain Ahab role and Section 230 as his white whale. The Netflix documentary of his story will be called “Moby Fyk.” In his…
Of Course Section 230 Applies to Amazon Reviews–McCall v. Zotos
This case involves a customer’s Amazon review asserting that a merchant sold fake goods. The merchant sued Amazon (pro se) for defamation based on the review. The 11th Circuit easily dismisses the claim per Section 230. ICS Provider. “Amazon’s website…
Section 230 Ends Another Suspended Twitter User’s Lawsuit–Zhang v. Twitter
I’m blogging this ruling mostly for completeness. I’ve blogged so many pro se lawsuits by suspended Twitter users and they all end the same. This one doesn’t break any new ground. Apparently, the plaintiff Taiming Zhang used his Twitter account…
Section 230 Doesn’t Apply to High Schoolers’ Online Bullying–Kutchinski v. Freeland Community School District
HK built an Instagram account impersonating a teacher. He “made one innocuous post on the account.” He unwisely shared the login credentials with two classmates, KL and LF. Those classmates made “incendiary posts” about other teachers (and tagged those teachers)…
Section 230 Immunizes Snap, Even if It’s “Inherently Dangerous”–L.W. v. Snap
Predators allegedly used Snap to groom minors for sex and to obtain CSAM from them. The plaintiffs asserted products liability and related claims against Snap, on the premise that Snap “is an inherently dangerous software product that Defendants deceptively advertise…
Google Isn’t Liable for Scam Ads–Ynfante v. Google
Ynfante responded to a scam ad shown when he Google-searched for “ebay customer service number,” and he called a phishing farm instead of eBay. “After Mr. Ynfante divulged his account information to the scam helpline, the scammers made purchases on…
Section 230 Once Again Immunizes Google’s Search Results–Metroka v. PA Law Enforcement
In June 2022, Nadia Metroka (a Florida lawyer, apparently) was arrested in Pennsylvania. “Information about the arrest was published on the Montgomery County Crimewatch website, and it was ‘picked up by GOOGLE’s search engine.’” (Is this the news release in…
Sad that Twitter Deplatformed Trump? Don’t Take It to Court–Rutenberg v. Twitter
Maria Rutenberg apparently found Trump’s tweets so meaningful that she sued Twitter for deplatforming Trump and subtracting that meaning from her life. Rutenberg can now scratch her Trump itch at Truth Social, plus Musk has invited Trump back to Twitter….