A 1996 law that reformed the telecommunications industry contained 26 phrases that allowed businesses like Facebook, Twitter, and Google to develop into the behemoths they are today.
Gonzalez v. Google, a case that will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court this week, questions whether tech companies are responsible for the content uploaded on their platforms.
Justices will rule on whether to allow a lawsuit against Google, which owns YouTube, by the family of an American college student slain in a terrorist assault in Paris over allegations that the video platform’s recommendation algorithm assisted extremists in spreading their message.
The outcomes of these cases could reshape the internet as we know it. Section 230 won’t be easily dismantled. But if it is, online speech could be drastically transformed.
What is section 230?
If a news site falsely calls you a swindler, you can sue the publisher for libel. But if someone posts that on Facebook, you can’t sue the company — just the person who posted it.
That’s thanks to Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which states that “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”
