Remove 2019 Remove Lawsuit Remove State law
article thumbnail

Ninth Circuit Says Section 230 Preempts “Defective Design” Claims–Doe v. Grindr

Eric Goldman

Even though the legal system punished the wrongdoers, the lawsuits continue. The panel summarizes: “Because Does state law claims necessarily implicate Grindrs role as a publisher of third-party content, 230 bars those claims. Salesforce * Omegle Defeats Lawsuit Over Users CappingMH v. Case Citation : Doe v.

Lawsuit 64
article thumbnail

YouTube Again Defeats FOSTA Lawsuit–In re YouTube Trafficking Litigation

Eric Goldman

This is a confusing lawsuit that has been through several names, including “Sarah v. Salesforce * Omegle Defeats Lawsuit Over User’s “Capping”–MH v. WebGroup Czech Republic * Instagram Defeats Lawsuit Claiming It Was a “Breeding Ground” for Sex Traffickers–Doe v. [Note: my blogging hiatus is due to a trip to China.

Lawsuit 95
professionals

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Omegle Defeats Lawsuit Over User’s “Capping”–MH v. Omegle

Eric Goldman

WebGroup Czech Republic * Instagram Defeats Lawsuit Claiming It Was a Breeding Ground for Sex TraffickersDoe v. Craigslist * Sex Trafficking Lawsuit Against Craigslist Moves ForwardML v. Salesforce * Latest Linkwrap on FOSTAs Aftermath * Section 230 Doesnt End Lawsuit Claiming Facebook Facilitated Sex TraffickingDoe v.

Lawsuit 52
article thumbnail

Allegations of a Bribe-Driven Facebook-OnlyFans Conspiracy Unsurprisingly Fall Apart in Court–Dangaard v. Instagram

Eric Goldman

In my previous post , I summarized: This lawsuit involves troubling allegations that Facebook executives ( allegedly , Nick Clegg, Nicola Mendelsohn, and Cristian Perrella) took bribes from OnlyFans-related entities to spike Facebook and Instagram posts that promoted competitors of OnlyFans. The plaintiffs’ allegations were sizzling.

Court 111
article thumbnail

2023 Quick Links: Section 230

Eric Goldman

Where the motion to dismiss concerns questions of law, additional discovery is not required. 2019) (“As courts uniformly recognize, § 230 immunizes internet services for third-party content that they publish, including false statements, against causes of action of all kinds.”). See, e.g. , Marshall’s Locksmith Serv.

article thumbnail

Should Copyright Preemption Moot Anti-Scraping TOS Terms? (Guest Blog Post)

Eric Goldman

Section 301(a) of the Copyright Act provides that “no person is entitled to any such right or equivalent right in any such work under the common law or statutes of any State.” With that, any state or common law claim that is equivalent to copyright must therefore be preempted. 2019 WL 3555509 (D. Taco Bell Corp. ,

Judge 98
article thumbnail

Contractual Control over Information Goods after ML Genius v. Google (Guest Blog Post)

Eric Goldman

That section states that rights under state laws that are “equivalent” to rights under copyright law are preempted. If the contract limits any action that copyright law restricts, meaning reproduction, distribution, adaptation, or public performance or display of works within the scope of copyright, it is preempted.

Court 98