"These are not like the nine greatest experts on the internet," liberal Justice Elena Kagan said of the court's members, eliciting laughter in the courtroom.
Kagan told a lawyer for the Gonzalez family, Eric Schnapper, that algorithms are widely used to organize and prioritize material on the internet and asked: "Does your position send us down the road such that 230 really can't mean anything at all?" "I'm trying to get you to explain to us how something that is standard on YouTube for virtually anything that you have an interest in suddenly amounts to 'aiding and abetting' because you're in the ISIS category," Justice Clarence Thomas told Schnapper, using initials for the Islamic State group.
"The videos just don't appear out of thin air, they appear pursuant to the algorithms," Roberts said."Why should there be protection for that?" Kagan asked.
Source: News Formal (newsformal.com)
🤞🏿
Placing distribution of information directly under political control is simply the worst of ideas.
Why do none of the article links this account Tweets ever direct to the article for me? It just goes to a generic page with links to other articles. On mobile.
Blinken_president2024
By extension, if criminals or terrorists are operating from a house that you rent to them, are you responsible for their actions? or, if you hit a pedestrian in a rental car, is the hire company liable?
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
A Supreme Court Case About ISIS and YouTube Could Change the Internet as We Know ItThis case has garnered far less attention than Gonzalez v. Google, but could be just as consequential.
Source: Slate - 🏆 716. / 51 Read more »
Opinion | The political world focuses on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court raceOpinion by Jennifer Rubin: If a progressive wins the seat, the court will likely defend abortion rights in a state where a significant majority of voters are pro-choice. My vote is for someone in between - We need reasonable pro-choice legislation. Abortion until 20 weeks then after that it should be only in medical emergencies. No pensions joe , go back to wherever cane from I think it’s a rock on the beach
Source: washingtonpost - 🏆 95. / 72 Read more »
Supreme Court for first time casts doubt on Section 230, the legal shield for Big TechThe legal shield known as Section 230 launched Big Tech and was largely unchallenged in the Supreme Court — until now. Any attempt to overturn 230 is a violation of the first amendment. Finding for the plaintiff puts all kinds of people at risk. Terrorist rents truck, blows up something: are the builders of the roads he used liable how about the truck manufacturer, or the rental agency?
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »
U.S. Supreme Court debates challenge to internet firms' legal shieldThe U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments in a major case that could weaken a legal shield that protects internet companies from a wide array of lawsuits in a dispute involving YouTube and the family of an American student fatally shot in a 2015 rampage by Islamist militants in Paris. We need the internet bill of rights So this is about … clickholes “ The family claimed that YouTube, through its computer algorithms, unlawfully recommended videos by the Islamic State militant group, which claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks that killed 130 people, to certain users. The recommendations…
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »
Supreme Court skeptical of upending Big Tech legal protectionThe Supreme Court expressed caution Tuesday on a challenge to big social media companies, worrying that stripping them of legal protection for how they promote content on their website could upend the entire internet economy.
Source: WashTimes - 🏆 235. / 63 Read more »