Call 855-808-4530 or email Gro[email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The United States Supreme Court did not destroy the Internet on May 18, 2023. That day, the Court released its opinions in Gonzalez v. Google LLC, 143 S. Ct. 1191 (2023) (per curiam), and Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, 143 S. Ct. 1206 (2023). In these companion cases from the Ninth Circuit, family members of ISIS victims sued large tech companies under the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) for allegedly aiding and abetting foreign terrorists by providing them with platforms “for spreading extremist propaganda, raising funds, and attracting new recruits.” Complaint ¶ 12, Taamneh v. Twitter, Inc., No. 3:17-cv-4107 (N.D. Cal. July 20, 2017). Defendants in both cases asserted defenses under 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) (Section 230). Section 230, generally speaking, shields online platforms from liability for otherwise actionable content users post on their sites. After the Supreme Court agreed to hear the cases on Oct. 3, 2022, worry quickly spread that the Court “could break the Internet” by weakening this liability shield. Isaac Chotiner, “Two Supreme Court Cases that Could Break the Internet,” New Yorker (Jan. 25, 2023). The Internet is still standing, but the Supreme Court’s reasoning in the 583-word Gonzalez opinion remains perplexing. Gonzalez and Taamneh are a story about how the Supreme Court “saved” the Internet from itself, and the Court needed both cases to do so.
Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.
By David A. Holley
An Executive Order released by the Biden Administration on Aug. 9 places increased importance on due diligence when investing in specific foreign countries. The Executive Order will regulate outbound investments in China with a focus on key technologies critical to safeguarding U.S. national security, including artificial intelligence.
By Erik B. Weinick
On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York’s inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.
By Daniella Main and Brooke Bolender
Most companies have experienced or will experience a data breach. Increasingly, companies also face the risks associated with mass arbitration weaponized by the overwhelming volume of claims after a breach.
By Wim Nauwelaerts
Businesses and organizations that (regularly) transfer personal data from the EU to the U.S. should carefully assess, on a case-by-case basis, whether it makes sense to rely on the new EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework or to use one of the other data transfer tools that are available under the GDPR.