On Wednesday, March 8 at 19:30 GMT:
In February, the US Supreme Court began hearing arguments for cases that some have described as having the power to rock the modern internet.
The focus of Gonzalez v Google and a related case, Twitter v Taamneh, is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which provides Internet companies with a legal liability shield against lawsuits arising from user-posted content. The Gonzalez case questions whether the algorithm designed by YouTube and parent company Google should be held liable for recommending ISIL recruitment videos to its users, while the Taamneh case examines whether Twitter is liable for complicity in “international terrorism” by allowing ISIL content on its site.
The debate on the cases comes as technology companies are increasingly scrutinized and pressured to be held accountable for hosting harmful or objectionable content on their platforms. But those defending Section 230, inclusive open internet advocates and rights groups such as the ACLUbelieve that broad interpretation of the law is integral to freedom of expression online and the very existence of social media.
In this episode of The Stream, we look at the debate over Section 230 and how the future may affect the internet as we know it.
In this episode of The Stream we speak with:
Julie Owono, @JulieOwono
Executive Director, Internet Without Borders
Megan Iori, @EPICprivacy
Senior Advisor, Electronic Privacy Information Center
Mukund Rathi, @EFF
Legal Officer, Electronic Frontier Foundation