<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Court Rejects Another Lawsuit Alleging that Internet Companies Suppress Conservative Views&#8211;Freedom Watch v. Google	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2020/06/court-rejects-another-lawsuit-alleging-that-internet-companies-suppress-conservative-views-freedom-watch-v-google.htm/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2020/06/court-rejects-another-lawsuit-alleging-that-internet-companies-suppress-conservative-views-freedom-watch-v-google.htm</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2020 14:58:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Section 230 Ends Demonetized YouTuber&#039;s Lawsuit-Lewis v. Google - Technology &#38; Marketing Law Blog		</title>
		<link>https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2020/06/court-rejects-another-lawsuit-alleging-that-internet-companies-suppress-conservative-views-freedom-watch-v-google.htm#comment-2607</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Section 230 Ends Demonetized YouTuber&#039;s Lawsuit-Lewis v. Google - Technology &#38; Marketing Law Blog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2020 14:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=21194#comment-2607</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] to this case, the opinion showed how these cases will fail with or without Section 230. (See also Freedom Watch v. Google, which failed without any reference to Section 230). That&#8217;s why I find it so exasperating [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] to this case, the opinion showed how these cases will fail with or without Section 230. (See also Freedom Watch v. Google, which failed without any reference to Section 230). That&#8217;s why I find it so exasperating [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
