** The Electronic Frontier Foundation is fighting to protect Section 230 immunity for app stores, arguing that forcing them to censor user speech could lead to widespread censorship.
📍 ** United States
**
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is currently hearing a case involving Apple, Google, and Facebook app stores and a group of plaintiffs who claim they were harmed by social casino apps. These plaintiffs spent significant sums on virtual chips within these games and allege the apps violate state gambling laws. The core of the legal battle rests on the interpretation of Section 230, a foundational law that has historically shielded internet intermediaries like app stores from liability for user-generated content. The lower court ruled that the app stores were losing their Section 230 immunity because they facilitated payments for virtual chips within the social casino apps.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed an amicus brief – their second – arguing forcefully for the preservation of Section 230. They contend that extending liability to app stores for simply processing payments for virtual chips would have a chilling effect, forcing all platforms to censor user content to avoid legal repercussions. This, they argue, would fundamentally undermine the open internet, severely limiting free speech and access to information.
Furthermore, the EFF highlighted the potential for a sweeping interpretation of the ruling, suggesting that any platform facilitating financial transactions for online content – beyond just app stores – would be vulnerable to lawsuits and compelled to censor user speech. This domino effect, they warn, would stifle innovation and create a far less open and accessible online environment.
**
Original Source: Link
** #Section230 #AppStores #OnlineFreedom #Censorship #SocialCasino #EFF #DigitalRights #InternetFreedom