Page 9 - Eric Schnapper News Today

The first of the week's two cases before the Supreme Court involving Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act left justices at times confused over what was being argued.

The case before the court stems from the death of American college student Nohemi Gonzalez in a terrorist attack in Paris in 2015.

The justices probably won’t shut down major websites like Google, Twitter, or YouTube.

Whether Google can be held liable for recommending harmful content on YouTube is at the heart of a watershed case that could shape the future of the internet.

SCOTUS heard oral arguments Tuesday in Gonzalez v. Google, which addresses whether Google can be held liable for content recommended by its algorithms.

In its first case about the federal law that is credited with helping create the modern internet, the Supreme Court seemed unlikely Tuesday to side with a family wanting to hold Google liable for the death of their daughter in a terrorist attack.

In its first case about the federal law that is credited with helping create the modern internet, the Supreme Court seems unlikely to side with a family wanting to hold Google liable for the death of their daughter who was killed in a terrorist attack

At issue in the case is a 1996 law that shields internet platforms from being sued for material that appears on their sites.

At the center of two cases to be argued over two days is Section 230, which provides tech companies a legal shield over what users post online.

Gonzalez will not be the case to challenge the consensus understanding of Section 230.