Defendant Failure-to-appear State law 
Eric Goldman
DECEMBER 26, 2023
Where the motion to dismiss concerns questions of law, additional discovery is not required. Where the motion to dismiss concerns questions of law, additional discovery is not required. Therefore, as MindGeek’s motion to dismiss concerns only questions of law, no discovery is required to rule on the motion to dismiss.
Eric Goldman
NOVEMBER 2, 2023
“Duffer seeks to hold Nextdoor, a service provider, liable for its failure to remove material posted by users of its website. . “Duffer seeks to hold Nextdoor, a service provider, liable for its failure to remove material posted by users of its website. Nextdoor appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Eric Goldman
JUNE 7, 2023
The plaintiffs asserted products liability and related claims against Snap, on the premise that Snap “is an inherently dangerous software product that Defendants deceptively advertise and promote in a way that facilitates sex crimes against children.” To get around Section 230, the plaintiffs attempted the Lemmon v.
Eric Goldman
APRIL 29, 2023
In addition, although the takedown notices state that the company contacting Defendants, Appdetex, is Yuga’s DMCA Agent, it does not state that the notice is a DMCA notice. I’ve documented dozens of ways that 512(f) claims have failed, so the failure of this claim isn’t surprising. Never has, never will.
Eric Goldman
JUNE 9, 2024
The court dismisses the case but gives the plaintiff the chance to amend the complaint to plead failure-to-warn and negligent design–because those arguments show up in virtually every 230 case now. . § 230, forecloses Doe’s claim as currently pled, because she seeks to hold Meta liable for content created by her trafficker.”
Eric Goldman
FEBRUARY 18, 2025
The panel summarizes: “Because Does state law claims necessarily implicate Grindrs role as a publisher of third-party content, 230 bars those claims. Doe fails to state a plausible TVPRA claim, so Doe cannot invoke a statutory exception to 230 immunity.” and is “a description of its moderation policy.”
Eric Goldman
DECEMBER 29, 2023
Ultimately, the alleged “defect” here is only relevant to Doe’s injury to the extent it made it easier or more difficult for other users to communicate with Doe, and thus Doe seeks to hold Grindr liable for its failure to regulate third party content. Doe sued Grindr for strict products liability, negligence, and FOSTA. ICS Provider.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
98 
Let's personalize your content