The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether internet and social media companies can be sued for providing and recommending terrorist content in a case in which an American student was murdered in cold blood by Islamist militants in Paris in 2015.
The Supreme Court heard the appeal by the parents and other relatives of Nohemi Gonzalez, a 23-year-old Californian studying in Paris, against a lower court ruling that acquitted YouTube, owned by Google LLC, of wrongdoing in the trial of the family, which is seeking damages under a U.S. anti-terrorism law.
The case was already dismissed by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, which based its decision on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which courts interpreted as immunizing computer services when they engage in activities traditionally carried out by publishers, such as deciding whether to view or edit third-party content.
The lawsuit against Google accuses Google of providing material support to terrorism in violation of the Anti-Terrorism Act by recommending videos to certain users via computer algorithms belonging to the Islamic State militant group, which claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks.
YouTube’s algorithm has helped the Islamic State spread its militant message by recommending the group’s videos to users, including those aimed at recruiting jihadist fighters. It also argues that Section 230 should not apply if the company’s platform recommends certain content through algorithms that identify and display content that users are most likely to be interested in because of their use of the service.
The source for this piece includes an article in Reuters.
