I certainly share your concern about the dangers in jurisdictions that follow the standard of pleading that the FR Civ P embodied pre-Iqbal. And I agree it is too conclusory under Iqbal / Twombly. What we can hope, in Washington at least, that the case is confined to the child sexual exploitation context, much as Bush v. Gore has been treated as a ticket good for this train only.

IMO, #6 shouldn’t survive Iqbal (if it were in federal court) because it’s a generic recitation without any factual support. If the #6 pleading works, then every plaintiff can and will easily plead around a Section 230 MTD by making the same generic recitation. Eric.

The BOZO statute {230} might have been OK in the earlier decades “online”. The outrageous BOZO permission-slip for communicating about misbehavior {230} does not survive the “straight face” test. “Pleading standards forum shopping” implies geezers protecting online porn till death, retirement or impeachment.

The politician who would fix the dishonorable U.S. judicial system and restore honorable democracy to the U.S. would have been born in 1975 but was NOT born because Roe v Wade did not allow protecting the human heartbeat. Her heartbeat was never heard.

Outrageous misbehavior encouraging {230} does not survive the “straight face” test and has not for decades.

Section 230 was for protecting anyone offering a venue online for the most obscene, indecent, or profane communications unable to be done in any other public broadcast medium. The “wholly new medium” mistake of Reno v ACLU was overruled by the FCC in response to citizen comments and other litigation.

Section 230 intended to utterly protect free speech and create a new medium for pornography and other communications seen in graffiti or communication venues unknown authors used to broadcast communications to the public with absolutely no concern about the legality of content being broadcast.

The wild, wild unregulated “wholly new medium” mistake of Reno v ACLU no longer exists or was realized as never existing. The resulting cultural correction motivated by declaring wires a Title II common carrier will take decades to be felt in the U.S.