Comments on: Once Again, Section 230 Protects Twitter’s Account Suspension Decisions–Brittain v. Twitter

By: KingCaster

KingCaster — Wed, 07 Aug 2019 04:26:00 +0000

It’s like you think these are good results Eric. They suck. And as you know, many legal scholars including Facebook’s own Amicus Counsel David Lukmire and IBM Director of Public Policy and many more agree with me.
https://howtosuefacebook.blogspot.com/2019/07/kingcast-v-facebook-oral-argument-nocal.html

Especially on a Civil Rights claim when you have a FB Diversity VP saying racism is prevalent on campus and on the platform BEFORE HE RESIGNED.

You know that that’s a Party Admission, right? Yah.

By: KingCaster

KingCaster — Wed, 07 Aug 2019 04:14:00 +0000

It’s like you thing these are good results Eric. They suck. And as you know, many legal scholars including Facebook’s own Amicus Counsel David Lukmire and IBM Director of Public Policy and many more agree with me.
https://howtosuefacebook.blogspot.com/2019/07/kingcast-v-facebook-oral-argument-nocal.html

Especially on a Civil Rights claim when you have a FB Diversity VP saying racism is prevalent on campus and on the platform BEFORE HE RESIGNED.

You know that that’s a Party Admission, right? Yah.

By: The Plaintiff Is Probably Pissed About Section 230-Fyk v. Facebook - Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Sat, 22 Jun 2019 08:36:44 +0000

[…] user content. This is my third such post in the last 9 days (see also Murphy v. Twitter and Brittain v. Twitter). The lawsuits and court rulings are basically all the same. Primarily due to the courts’ […]

By: Twitter Gets Another Significant Section 230 Win in Lawsuit by Suspended User-Murphy v. Twitter - Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Fri, 14 Jun 2019 19:07:23 +0000

[…] Third Party Content. Murphy’s tweets qualify. Note how this move continues to collapse 230(c)(1) and 230(c)(2) by treating the filtered/removed content as third-party content. The court addresses this issue in […]