CNN
–
An adverse ruling against Google in a closely watched Supreme Court case about YouTube’s recommendation engine could have unintended consequences for much of the wider Internet, the search giant has argued. Legal filings Thursday
YouTube owner Google is fighting a high-stakes court battle over whether algorithmically generated YouTube recommendations are exempt from the big tech’s signature liability shield, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Section 230 broadly protects technology platforms from lawsuits against companies’ decisions to moderate content. But a Supreme Court decision that says AI-based recommendations don’t qualify for those protections “could threaten the core functions of the Internet,” Google wrote in its brief.
“Websites like Google and Etsy rely on algorithms to sift through mountains of user-generated content and display the most relevant content for each user,” the company wrote. “If the plaintiffs can avoid [Section 230] Regardless of how websites curate content or try to hold users accountable for liking or sharing articles, the Internet will become a messy mess and a minefield of lawsuits.”
In the face of such rulings, websites may have to choose between deliberately over-moderating their websites, scrubbing them of virtually everything that might be considered offensive, or no moderation at all to avoid the risk of liability, Google argued.
Driving the lawsuit is the claim that Google violated a US anti-terrorism law with its content algorithm by recommending pro-ISIS YouTube videos to users. The plaintiff in the case is the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, who was killed in the 2015 ISIS attack in Paris.
In the filing, Google said “YouTube abhors terrorism” and cited “increasingly effective measures” to limit the spread of terrorist content on its platform, before emphasizing that the company cannot be sued for recommending videos due to its Section 230 liability.
The case, Gonzalez v. Google, was seen as a bellwether for content moderation and was one of the first Supreme Court cases to consider Article 230 since its passage in 1996. Multiple Supreme Court justices have expressed interest in considering the law, which has been widely interpreted by courts, defended by the tech industry and sharply criticized by politicians on both sides of the aisle.
The Biden administration, in a legal briefing last month, argued That Section 230 should not extend the safety recommendation algorithm. President Joe Biden has long called for changes to Section 230, requiring technology platforms to take more responsibility for the content displayed on their websites. As recently as Tuesday, Biden published A Wall Street Journal op-ed urging Congress to amend Section 230.
But in a blog post Thursday, Google General Counsel Halimah Delain Prado argued that narrowing Section 230 would threaten online and small business lawsuits, chill speech and increase economic activity on the Internet.
“Services may become less useful and less reliable – as efforts to root out scams, fraud, conspiracy, malware, violence, harassment and more are stalled,” wrote Delain Prado.
Where we collect the information from Source link
Disclaimer:- We include in each post a link to where each content on our website is collected from.If there is a complaint against any post please contact us directly.
Email: post-support.dailyfastnews24.com
You can also write on the popular online news portal dailyfastnews24.com. Writing topics feature, travel, lifestyle, career, IT, agriculture and nature. Send your entry today to [email protected]
advertisement:-If you would like to advertise on our website please contact us here.Our Ads team will contact you very soon.
Email: [email protected]
The cost of advertising:- 1 Post 100 USD Lifetime.
Thank you very much for visiting our website. Have a good day.