Search for: "In Re Interest of CDA"
Results 21 - 40
of 136
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Feb 2020, 11:53 am
Rather, they’re arguing that EARN IT will hurt end-to-end encryption. [read post]
18 Sep 2017, 6:33 am
In brief, the proposed legislation threatens to roll back aspects of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), which relieve content providers, or so-called “intermediaries” (e.g., Google, Facebook, Twitter) of liability for the content that is hosted on their platforms. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 9:45 am
We made an effort to show them websites we thought they would find interesting. [read post]
31 Jul 2017, 9:57 am
Plaintiffs haven’t asked US courts to do that, and I doubt they’re likely to. [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 8:47 pm
What the most interesting TOS you’ve come across? [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 10:07 am
I’ll focus only on the Section 230 aspect of the ruling, but I encourage you to read the whole thing if you’re interested in the interface between defamation law, #MeToo, and online group discussions. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 8:58 am
As Judge LaPlante explained, that interpretation was contrary to the express language of the statute, and in effect constituted a judicial re-writing of the CDA. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 8:58 am
As Judge LaPlante explained, that interpretation was contrary to the express language of the statute, and in effect constituted a judicial re-writing of the CDA. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 10:31 am
What is the CDA? [read post]
16 May 2012, 5:47 pm
Before I explain the background for what’s going on here, I want to be clear about a few things: I have no financial interest in CDA Law, nor am I being paid to write this. [read post]
16 May 2012, 5:47 pm
Before I explain the background for what’s going on here, I want to be clear about a few things: I have no financial interest in CDA Law, nor am I being paid to write this. [read post]
12 Apr 2018, 10:05 am
Cruz said, “The predicate for Section 230 immunity under the CDA is that you’re a neutral public forum. [read post]
16 Apr 2007, 8:51 pm
(That's a reference to the CDA case, now ten years old.) [read post]
6 May 2019, 10:28 am
(discussing misperception that CDA 230 causes platforms to tolerate such speech). [77] Snyder v. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 12:39 pm
(Compare the Quiznos analysis—they’re fundamentally incompatible, I think.) [read post]
15 May 2007, 4:19 pm
And that's where it gets interesting (if you're an Internet law and culture wonk) and weird (if you pay attention to who's advertising on that Web site). [read post]
4 Apr 2008, 9:44 am
The [CDA] was not meant to create a lawless no man's-land on the Internet. [read post]
29 Nov 2012, 11:31 am
However, if there’s interest, I may do my own later as most of the events happened while I was on hiatus. [read post]
14 Jul 2008, 2:05 am
Bloggers have the right to political speech - We’re working with a number of other public-interest organizations to ensure that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) doesn’t gag bloggers’ election-related speech. [read post]
16 Jul 2013, 7:48 am
[I]f Judge Bertelsman’s ruling on the CDA [is] allowed to stand, it would open the door for a flood of lawsuits against every website that allows user-generated content. [read post]
