The Third Circuit panel's ruling undermines Section 230 by suggesting TikTok's video recommendations are its own speech, losing vital protections for platform intermediaries.
Section 230 has been essential for internet growth, shielding platforms from liability for user-generated content, thus fostering diversity and the availability of third-party speech.
We argue that First Amendment protections for editorial choices coexist with Section 230 immunity, which should not be undermined by misinterpretations of the law.
Without Section 230, platforms could face liability for every user post, which would deter open communication and the availability of diverse perspectives online.
[
Collection
]
[
|
...
]