Snapchat Photos Don’t Constitute “Virtual” Physical Presence–People v. White

The defendant was a high school teacher and coach. She sent photos to one of her students, WB, via Snapchat. The court says WB and the defendant never discussed the photos. The court describes the photos as “somewhat risqué” because…

Facebook Defeats Lawsuit Over Alleged 'Shadowbanning'--De Souza Millan v. Facebook

Facebook Defeats Lawsuit Over Alleged ‘Shadowbanning’–De Souza Millan v. Facebook

The term “shadowbanning” does not have a single well-accepted definition. In my Content Moderation Remedies paper, I say: “A shadowban keeps a user’s account active, but only the accountholder can see the content.” However, others sometimes use the term as…

New Article: "Content Moderation Remedies"

New Article: “Content Moderation Remedies”

I’m excited to share my latest paper, called “Content Moderation Remedies.” I’ve been working on this project 2+ years, and this is the first time I’m sharing the draft publicly. I think many of you will find it interesting, so…

State Legislator Doesn't Understand That He Works for the Government--Attwood v. Clemons

State Legislator Doesn’t Understand That He Works for the Government–Attwood v. Clemons

Florida Rep. Chuck Clemons has a Twitter account. A constituent, Attwood, tweeted at him that he opposed Clemons’ position on a gun reform bill. Clemons felt the tweet was aggressive. Clemons reviewed Attwood’s tweets, saw profane tweets directed at other…

Star Rating at Google Review Isn't Defamatory--Gursten v. Doe 1

Star Rating at Google Review Isn’t Defamatory–Gursten v. Doe 1

The plaintiff is a lawyer. Doe 2, under the pseudonym “Patrick Anderson,” left a one-star rating for the lawyer (without any explanatory text) on the lawyer’s Google Review page. The plaintiff protested that he never had a client named Patrick…

Newspaper Isn't State Actor--Plotkin v. Astorian

Newspaper Isn’t State Actor–Plotkin v. Astorian

Plotkin placed a political ad with the Daily Astorian newspaper that allegedly advocated against Holcom and Hilton. The opinion doesn’t explain why Plotkin objected to these candidates, but Plotkin’s frequent letters to the editor give some clues. Even without advertising,…

Important Second Circuit Opinion Says Section 230(c)(2)(A) Protects Online Account Terminations--Domen v. Vimeo

Important Second Circuit Opinion Says Section 230(c)(2)(A) Protects Online Account Terminations–Domen v. Vimeo

Vimeo is a video hosting service. Domen is a “former homosexual.” He posted videos to Vimeo that allegedly violated Vimeo’s policy against “the promotion of sexual orientation change efforts” (SOCE). Vimeo notified Domen of the violation and gave him 24…

Comments on the PROMISE Act

Comments on the PROMISE Act

Senators Lee, Braun, and Moran introduced the “Promoting Responsibility Over Moderation In the Social-media Environment Act,” the “PROMISE Act.” (It’s a reintroduction of S. 4975 from last session). This is a transparency-focused bill that partially overlaps with last year’s PACT…

Catching Up on the Parler v. AWS Dispute

Catching Up on the Parler v. AWS Dispute

I blogged Parler’s unsuccessful request to get injunctive relief preventing AWS’s termination of Parler as a customer. Since then, Parler dismissed the federal court lawsuit, filed a state court lawsuit, AWS removed the second lawsuit to federal court, and the…

Social Media Ownership Disputes, Part I: the Satanic Temple of Washington Can’t Get Its Facebook Pages Back

Social Media Ownership Disputes, Part I: the Satanic Temple of Washington Can’t Get Its Facebook Pages Back

This is part 1 of a 2-part series covering social media ownership disputes. This dispute involves the online accounts of the Satanic Temple of Washington: two Facebook pages, one of which had 17,000 followers, a Twitter account, and a “google…