<p>US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favour of Google, Meta and Twitter, stating that the social media giants cannot be held responsible for posts carrying content supportive of terrorist groups such as Islamic State (ISIS). Two cases were filed by a US victim of the 2015 Paris attacks while the third case was brought by the family of a victim of a 2017 attack by ISIS group on an Istanbul nightclub. The justices noted that the cases against social media companies did not amount to a liable infraction.</p>

<h2><strong>Court refused to recommend changes to Section 230</strong></h2>

<p>The victims of the terrorist attacks who filed cases against social media companies were seeking changes to a law called Section 230, which gives online platforms blanket immunity from liabilities arising from third-party content on their sites. The immunity prevails even if the platform recommends offensive content to its users.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Section 230 became law in 1996 and was meant to uphold the freedom of speech in the United States. However, experts are increasingly crediting the law for the increase in hateful content on social media platforms.</p>

<h2><strong>Big relief to social media companies</strong></h2>

<p>The judgment on Thursday came as a big relief to social media companies. They believe that without the protective immunity from Section 230, the websites will be open to lawsuits for content posted by users. An association representing US tech companies said the decision was good news.</p>

<p>"The court correctly recognised the narrow posture of these cases and declined to rewrite a key tenet of US Internet law, preserving free expression online and a thriving digital economy,” said Matt Schruers, head of the Computer &amp; Communications Industry Association.</p>

<h2><strong>What’s the US Congress doing?</strong></h2>

<p>Congress is heavily divided on the issue, and it has failed to update the rules to combat advanced challenges. However, different US states have passed laws to hold TikTok, Meta, Twitter and YouTube liable for content that appears on their site.&nbsp;</p>

<p><a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/openai-ceo-testifies-before-us-congress-calls-regulation-of-artificial-intelligence-critical-593057"><strong>Also Read |&nbsp;OpenAI CEO testifies before US Congress, calls regulation of artificial intelligence ‘critical’</strong></a></p>

<p>The Biden administration last year urged the US Supreme Court to hold social media companies accountable for promoting harmful content and sided with a family seeking to sue Alphabet Inc.’s Google over a terrorist attack. However, over the past three years, the administration has failed to enact any such law that would allow victims of terrorism to pursue legal battles against the social media giants.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<p><strong>WATCH WION LIVE HERE</strong></p>

<p><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe></p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favour of Google, Meta and Twitter, stating that the social media giants cannot be held responsible for posts carrying content supportive of terrorist groups such as Islamic State (ISIS).

US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favour of Google, Meta and Twitter, stating that the social media giants cannot be held responsible for posts carrying content supportive of terrorist groups such as Islamic State (ISIS). Two cases were filed by a US victim of the 2015 Paris attacks while the third case was brought by the family of a victim of a 2017 attack by ISIS group on an Istanbul nightclub. The justices noted that the cases against social media companies did not amount to a liable infraction. Court refused to recommend changes to Section 230 The victims of the terrorist attacks who filed cases against social media companies were seeking changes to a law called Section 230, which gives online platforms blanket immunity from liabilities arising from third-party content on their sites. The immunity prevails even if the platform recommends offensive content to its users. Section 230 became law in 1996 and was meant to uphold the freedom of speech in the United States. However, experts are increasingly crediting the law for the increase in hateful content on social media platforms. Big relief to social media companies The judgment on Thursday came as a big relief to social media companies. They believe that without the protective immunity from Section 230, the websites will be open to lawsuits for content posted by users. An association representing US tech companies said the decision was good news. "The court correctly recognised the narrow posture of these cases and declined to rewrite a key tenet of US Internet law, preserving free expression online and a thriving digital economy,” said Matt Schruers, head of the Computer & Communications Industry Association. What’s the US Congress doing? Congress is heavily divided on the issue, and it has failed to update the rules to combat advanced challenges. However, different US states have passed laws to hold TikTok, Meta, Twitter and YouTube liable for content that appears on their site. Also Read | OpenAI CEO testifies before US Congress, calls regulation of artificial intelligence ‘critical’ The Biden administration last year urged the US Supreme Court to hold social media companies accountable for promoting harmful content and sided with a family seeking to sue Alphabet Inc.’s Google over a terrorist attack. However, over the past three years, the administration has failed to enact any such law that would allow victims of terrorism to pursue legal battles against the social media giants. WATCH WION LIVE HERE ×

Social media companies not liable for promoting pro-ISIS content, rules US Supreme Court

pro-isis

Pro Isis, News on Pro Isis, stories on Pro Isis, articles on Pro Isis, Pro Isis stories at Wion, Pro Isis news, Pro Isis latest news

pro isis

Social media companies not liable for promoting pro-ISIS content, rules US Supreme Court