10

Gonzalez v. Google: Live updates on Supreme Court case that could transform inte...

 1 year ago
source link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/02/21/gonzalez-v-google-section-230-supreme-court/
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
neoserver,ios ssh client

Gonzalez v. Google: Live updates on Supreme Court case that could transform internet

Advertisement
Close
Supreme Court hears internet law case
Subtitle Settings
Font
Font Size
Font Edge
Font Color
Background
Gonzalez v. Google argues that tech companies should be legally liable for harmful content their algorithms promote. (Video: The Washington Post)
Listen
Gift Article
Share

The Supreme Court on Tuesday is hearing oral arguments in Gonzalez v. Google, a lawsuit that argues tech companies should be legally liable for harmful content their algorithms promote. The case could shift the foundations of internet law.

It stems from the killing of 23-year-old Nohemi Gonzalez, a college exchange student, by Islamic State gunmen in Paris in 2015. The Gonzalez family contends that by recommending Islamic State-related content, YouTube — which is owned by Google — acted as a recruiting platform for the group in violation of U.S. laws against aiding and abetting terrorists.

Google argues that a law known as Section 230 protects it from legal responsibility for the third-party videos that its recommendation algorithms surface and that such immunity is essential to tech companies’ ability to provide useful and safe content to their users. The Gonzalez family’s lawyers say that applying Section 230 to algorithmic recommendations incentivizes promoting harmful content — and denies victims a way to seek redress, even if they show that those recommendations caused injuries or death.

Here’s what to know

  • Courts generally have found that Section 230 shields tech giants from culpability over the posts, photos and videos that people share on their services. But these wins have come despite objections from some prominent judges who say lower courts have read the law’s protections too broadly. Those pushing for a change warn that when Section 230 was written, the contours of today’s online marketplace of ideas were not yet clear.
  • The Gonzalez lawsuit is one of several landmark tech cases pending before the Supreme Court, offering the justices an opportunity to definitively addresswhether and how internet regulation should be changed.
  • Oral arguments began shortly after 10 a.m. Eastern time and will continue until about noon. Audio is being live-streamed on the court’s website, a practice that began when the court was holding arguments remotely because of the coronavirus pandemic. The audio is embedded at the top of this live file, so you can listen in as you read analysis and context from Post reporters.
6 min ago
Advertisement
6 min ago

How recommendation algorithms handle extreme content

Return to menu

The main job of social media recommendation algorithms over the years has been to keep people engaged and interested in using the site. Largely that means they push content that is shown to make people spend more time on the site, giving the owner the opportunity to show more ads and make more money.

In a famous 2018 post, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg explained that engagement goes up the closer content gets to breaking the website’s rules. In other words, incendiary content that makes people angry, such as polarizing political and cultural debates, is proven to get people to spend more time on social media platforms.

Advertisement
9 min ago

Thomas, Alito express confusion about plaintiffs’ case against Google

Return to menu

Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., two of the Supreme Court justices who previously suggested that the court should take up Section 230, expressed confusion during oral arguments about how the Gonzalez family’s liability claim against Google applies to the law.

Thomas, who has spoken critically of the liability shield in past opinions, said he didn’t “understand” how the company suggesting videos to users could amount to “aiding and abetting” an act of terror during an exchange with the family’s representative.

Advertisement
17 min ago
24 min ago
Advertisement
37 min ago
39 min ago
Advertisement
1 hour ago
Advertisement
1 hour ago
1 hour ago
1 hour ago
2 hours ago
2 hours ago
2 hours ago
512x288_TodaysHeadlines_tstmp_1623893120.jpg
NewsletterDaily
Today’s Headlines
The most important news stories of the day, curated by Post editors, delivered every morning.

About Joyk


Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK