This is gonna be super interesting. Do they appeal to SCOTUS, and risk them potentially ruling that it's (230) too broad in scope? Or do they tuck tail, go back to the trial court, take their whipping, and just agree to settle...and then try to figure out some nerdy algorithm that picks up on trafficking terms, codes, etc.?
SCOTUS could say it's too broad. On the other hand, it could also say - hey we're really sorry this happened to you, victims, but how in the H E double hockey sticks does a tech company prevent this from occurring? If a message has a term that COULD BE obviously sexual, like "boobs", does the message or post get lost in cyberspace before received/posted? And how many minutes does it take someone to realize that and just come up with a code word? 80085 = BOOBS?
Just remember--every single rule, algorithm, law, etc. that is used to prevent sex trafficking can ALSO be used to prevent consensual prostitution, as well as legal sex work such as stripping. The more that websites and tech companies are held responsible for content, the more likely it is that things YOU like will be banned, simply because somebody else finds those things offensive.
4 comments
Latest
SCOTUS could say it's too broad. On the other hand, it could also say - hey we're really sorry this happened to you, victims, but how in the H E double hockey sticks does a tech company prevent this from occurring? If a message has a term that COULD BE obviously sexual, like "boobs", does the message or post get lost in cyberspace before received/posted? And how many minutes does it take someone to realize that and just come up with a code word? 80085 = BOOBS?