The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Yolo could be held liable for misrepresenting its terms of service, reviving a lawsuit filed by users' families.
Families argued that Yolo's ten-person staff couldn't effectively monitor the app's ten million active daily users, making its promise to unmask bullies impossible to keep.
The decision emphasized that while Yolo cannot be held liable for design defects, it may still be accountable for not honoring its commitments to users.
The case highlights the limitations of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, particularly regarding misrepresentations in a platform's terms of service.
Collection
[
|
...
]