Reddit argues it isn't like other social platforms in case against Australia's social media ban | TechCrunch

"Reddit enables online interactions about the content that users post on the site. It facilitates knowledge sharing from one user to other users. It is not a significant purpose of the site to enable interactions engaged in because of a particular user's relationship with or interest in another user as a person [...] Reddit is significantly different from other sites that allow for users to become "friends" with one another, or to post photos about themselves, or to organise events,"

"And if the legislation isn't overturned, the company says it should be exempted from the law because it doesn't meet the legislation's definition of a "social media platform." Reddit is essentially asking the Australian High Court to address some of the questions raised about the legislation, which requires 10 major services to deactivate under-16s' accounts and prevent them from using the app. Critics argue that the law infringes on children's rights, and companies have sought to raise questions about what "social media" even defines."

Reddit has filed a case in Australia's High Court seeking to overturn or be exempted from a law that bans children under 16 from using social media. The law, effective December 10, requires ten major services to deactivate under-16s' accounts and block their app access. Reddit argues the measure limits free political discourse by preventing children from airing views and contends that Reddit does not meet the legislation's definition of a 'social media platform.' Reddit describes the site as a collection of public fora organized by subject, focused on content-based interactions and knowledge sharing rather than facilitating social relationships like friend lists, photos, or events.

Read at TechCrunch