Plus: The real message behind DeSantis' abortion anecdote, midwives sue over Alabama regulations, and more…
Section 230, the court says, immunizes good-faith attempts to block spam—and RNC didn't introduce enough evidence of bad faith.
Plaintiffs in Missouri v. Biden allege that federal pressure to remove and suppress COVID-19 material on Facebook and Twitter violates the First Amendment.
When it comes to conflicts with people engaged in unpopular or disfavored speech, too many journalists side with the feds.
A new documentary film argues that the second-largest website on the planet is flooded with misinformation. Is that right?
The senators say they're creating an "independent, bipartisan regulator charged with licensing and policing the nation's biggest tech companies." What could go wrong?
Expect the very foundations of the internet to come under attack from politicians and the mainstream media.
Plus: A new lawsuit in Montana over the state's TikTok ban, the economic realities of online content creation, the rights of private companies, and more...
The narrow rulings concluded the platforms aren’t responsible for bad people using their communication services.
Plus: Connecticut may exonerate witches, federal regulators are waging a quiet war on crypto, and more...
Join Reason on YouTube and Facebook Thursday at 1 p.m. Eastern for a discussion about Congress' attempt to ban TikTok with the RESTRICT Act.
A senator, a state attorney general, and a former congressman excoriated the law while getting much of it wrong.
The Court’s decisions in Gonzalez and subsequent cases could lead to impossible, incompatible consequences.
The Supreme Court’s newest member weighs in on the meaning of Section 230 in Gonzalez v. Google.
Plus: The National Endowment for Democracy ends funding of conservative media blacklist, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear major internet free speech case, and more...
Section 230 helped the internet flourish. Now its scope is under scrutiny.
(Note that this case is about immunity when Internet platforms provide access to material, not the separate question about immunity when Internet platforms block access to material.)
The 2018 law criminalizes websites that "promote or facilitate" prostitution. Two of three judges on the panel pushed back against government claims that this doesn't criminalize speech.
A Supreme Court case illustrates the potential costs of making it easier to sue social media platforms over user-generated content.
There's a good reason why algorithms are still protected by Section 230.
The famous internet law is headed for the High Court.
The lawsuit alleges that TikTok's algorithm funnels inappropriate content directly to teens. That not only defies logic, but it is also antithetical to how a social media platform keeps users.
While "the 26 words that created the internet" have been under fire from both sides, two groups argue that the 1996 law is essential to the future of abortion rights.
In a post-FOSTA world, Section 230 still protects websites from lawsuits over criminal sexual conduct by their users.
In his dismissal order, the judge cited Section 230, the law protecting websites from liability for user-generated content.
Does Section 230 shield YouTube from lawsuits about recommendations? Can Twitter be forced to pay damages over the terrorists it hasn’t banned?
Subreddit Gets Users To Call Texas Gov. Greg Abbott a 'Little Piss Baby' To Defy Content Moderation Law
Reddit users are protesting Texas' H.B. 20, which forces social media platforms to host speech they find objectionable.
The case is now on appeal after a lower court said the ban on websites promoting prostitution didn't concern protected speech.
A lawsuit alleges that the social media giant "tries to conceal the dangerous and addictive nature of its product, lulling users and parents into a false sense of security."
What happens when YouTube and Facebook can be held liable for their users’ speech?
Massie was the only House member to vote against a resolution demanding social media companies do more to track and suppress antisemitic content.
Plus: A court rejects a "discriminatory harassment" ban at a Florida university, a private space mission heads back to earth, and more...
The author of the definitive history of Section 230 is back with a controversial new book, The United States of Anonymous.
The SAFE SEX Workers Study Act would look at the impact of FOSTA and the seizure of sites like Backpage and Rentboy.
In a statement respecting the denial of certiorari, Justice Thomas suggested some courts are adopting an overly expansive interpretation of the immunity conferred by Section 230.
The conservative think tank identifies some genuine concerns about tech companies, but gets the prescription wrong.