2H 2017 & Q1 2018 Quick Links, Part 3: Section 230, Consumer Reviews
Section 230 * Backpage.com, LLC, V. Hawley, 2017 WL 5726868 (E.D. Mo Nov. 28, 2017): Backpage cites Doe No. 1 for the proposition that, as an interactive computer service provider, its “choices about what content can appear on the website…
DMCA Safe Harbor Applies to Some Unfair Competition Claims–Capitol Records v. Vimeo
You probably remember this case. Copyright owners sued the video hosting site Vimeo for third party uploaded videos that allegedly infringed their copyrights. Given this was the paradigmatic situation the DMCA safe harbor was designed to address, you’d think this…
Fifth Court Rejects ‘Material Support for Terrorism’ Claims Against Social Media Sites–Crosby v. Twitter
[Just a reminder that Section 230’s evisceration will happen upon Pres. Trump’s signature] Victims of the 2016 Pulse Nightclub shooting in Orlando, aided by the indefatigable 1-800-LAWFIRM and Excolo Law, sued social media providers. They alleged that the shooter was inspired…
Backpage Loses Another Section 230 Motion (Again Without SESTA/FOSTA)–Florida Abolitionists v. Backpage
During Congress’ SESTA/FOSTA deliberations, opponents repeatedly promised that the Doe v. Backpage litigation in Massachusetts would imminently provide key insights into Section 230’s purported limitations. Indeed, a week after the Senate passed the Worst of Both Worlds FOSTA, the court…
District Court Ruling Highlights Congress’ Hastiness To Pass ‘Worst of Both Worlds FOSTA’– Doe 1 v. Backpage
Backpage has been the poster child for Section 230’s purported failings. The argument goes (1) Backpage facilitates sex trafficking, (2) Section 230 protects Backpage, so (3) Section 230 is evil. That was the core message of the so-called “documentary” I Am Jane…
More on the Unconstitutional Retroactivity of ‘Worst of Both Worlds FOSTA’ (Guest Blog Post)
by guest blogger Alex F. Levy [For a discussion of retroactivity concerns under 47 U.S.C. §230(e)(5)(A), see my earlier post.] A law violates the Constitution’s Ex Post Facto clause if it “makes more burdensome the punishment for a crime, after its commission, or…deprives one charged with…
DMCA’s Unhelpful 512(f) Preempts Helpful State Law Claims–Stevens v. Vodka and Milk
As part of the DMCA, Congress enacted a cause of action for people who send bogus copyright takedown notices, codified at 17 USC 512(f). It was a good thought executed terribly. The courts have interpreted the law to require subjective bad…
YouTube Isn’t a Company Town (Duh)–Prager University v. Google
Prager University produces videos designed to convert teenagers into conservatives. It has posted over 250 videos to YouTube. YouTube has placed some of those videos into “restricted mode,” which blocks the videos’ availability to YouTube users who voluntarily operate in…
Senate Passes ‘Worst of Both Worlds FOSTA’ (Linkwrap)
Guest-bloggers and I have already blogged SESTA and FOSTA about 2 dozen times (see below), so there’s not much to say specifically about the Senate’s approval of the Worst of Both Worlds FOSTA (without further amendment). I already explained most of the problems…
Why FOSTA’s Restriction on Prostitution Promotion Violates the First Amendment (Guest Blog Post)
by guest blogger Alex F. Levy 18 U.S.C. §2421A(a) violates the First Amendment. While “[o]ffers to engage in illegal transactions are categorically excluded from First Amendment protection,” this provision prohibits far more than that. U.S. v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285,…