What is Section 230 and how come Internet Platforms aren’t liable?

Section 230 is a section of Title 47 of the United States Code that was enacted as part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which is Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and generally provides immunity for online computer services with respect to third-party content generated by its users.

The law was created to protect internet platforms from being held responsible for the content that users post on their sites. This is important because it allows platforms to moderate content without fear of legal repercussions. Without Section 230, platforms would be forced to either allow all content, even harmful or illegal content, or moderate content at their own risk.

Section 230 has been credited with helping to allow rapid proliferation and innovation with the modern Internet and social media platforms. It has allowed platforms to grow and thrive by giving them the freedom to moderate content without fear of legal repercussions. However, Section 230 has also been criticized for allowing platforms to spread harmful or illegal content.

In recent years, there have been calls to reform or repeal Section 230. However, it is unclear whether these calls will be successful. Section 230 is a complex law with a long history, and it is unlikely to be changed without a significant amount of debate.

There is a significant case currently with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) - Gonzales v. Google. The case centers on whether or not Google can be held liable for the content of videos that are recommended to users on YouTube.

The case was brought by the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, who was killed in the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks. The family alleges that YouTube (owned by Alphabet/Google) aided and abetted the attacks by recommending videos from ISIS to users on YouTube.

Google argues that it is protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which immunizes websites from liability for content that is posted by third parties. Google also argues that it has a First Amendment right to recommend content to users, even if that content is controversial or harmful.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in the case in the coming months. The ruling could have a significant impact on the future of the internet, as it will clarify the scope of Section 230 and the liability of websites for the content that is posted on their sites.