While a federal law typically shields internet companies from
lawsuits over content posted by users, the Philadelphia-based
3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled the law does
not bar Nylah Anderson's mother from pursuing claims that
TikTok's algorithm recommended the challenge to her daughter.
U.S. Circuit Judge Patty Shwartz, writing for the three-judge
panel, said that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
of 1996 only immunizes information provided by third parties and
not recommendations TikTok itself made via an algorithm
underlying its platform.
She acknowledged the holding was a departure from past court
rulings by her court and others holding that Section 230
immunizes an online platform from liability for failing to
prevent users from transmitting harmful messages to others.
But she said that reasoning no longer held after a U.S. Supreme
Court ruling in July on whether state laws designed to restrict
the power of social media platforms to curb content they deem
objectionable violate their free speech rights.
In those cases, the Supreme Court held a platform's algorithm
reflects "editorial judgments" about "compiling the third-party
speech it wants in the way it wants." Shwartz said under that
logic, content curation using algorithms is speech by the
company itself, which is not protected by Section 230.
"TikTok makes choices about the content recommended and promoted
to specific users, and by doing so, is engaged in its own
first-party speech," she wrote.
TikTok did not respond to requests for comment.
Tuesday's ruling reversed a lower-court judge's decision
dismissing on Section 230 grounds the case filed by Tawainna
Anderson against TikTok and its Chinese parent company ByteDance.
She sued after her daughter Nylah died in 2021 after attempting
the blackout challenge using a purse strap hung in her mother's
closet.
"Big Tech just lost its 'get-out-of-jail-free card,'" Jeffrey
Goodman, the mother's lawyer, said in a statement.
U.S. Circuit Judge Paul Matey, in a opinion partially concurring
with Tuesday's ruling, said TikTok in its "pursuit of profits
above all other values" may choose to serve children content
emphasizing "the basest tastes" and "lowest virtues."
"But it cannot claim immunity that Congress did not provide," he
wrote.
(Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Nick Zieminski)
[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All
rights reserved.]
Copyright 2022 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may
not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|
|