CONTENT REGULATION IN THE AGE OF MISINFORMATION. Part III. Plaintiffs at the Gates

     The attached alert: “Content Regulation in the Age of Misinformation – Part III: Plaintiffs at the Gates”. Dates will follow soon. The attached alert discusses the recent California jury verdict finding Meta and Google liable for social media addiction. In a future webinar, we will review the decision from legal, legislative and societal perspectives, as well as “how to litigate” assessments from both a plaintiff’s and a defendant’s point of view.

     We will also discuss how the plaintiffs managed to circumvent “Section 230” liability, the statutory immunity shield that generally protects online platforms from content-related liability. The liability shield – and its legislative purpose – was discussed at length in an editorial published on our website: https://wstelecomlaw.com/2020/10/the-2020-presidential-election-politics-and-telecommunications-the-death-of-the-good-samaritan-maybe/   Section 230 was originally drafted to protect our then-client, Prodigy, from publisher liability. It was not intended to protect Big Tech from tort liability, e.g., “slip and fall” negligence for failing to shovel snow outside their offices. More to follow soon.