A judge from California questioned social media companies' arguments against holding them liable for failure-to-warn claims related to youth addiction, suggesting a broader interpretation of services.
Kuhl highlighted that California law requires service providers, like dry cleaners, to warn about hazards, emphasizing that social media companies could similarly carry such responsibilities.
The judge drew parallels with prior cases involving tobacco companies, indicating that the First Amendment defense against compelled warnings did not hold up, which could impact the social media defense.
On the topic of Section 230, Kuhl noted that the recent Supreme Court ruling may impact the interpretation of liability for video recommendation algorithms used by social media platforms.
Collection
[
|
...
]