"The EFF argues that the app stores should not lose Section 230 immunity for hosting 'social casino' apps just because they process payments for virtual chips within those apps. Otherwise, all platforms that facilitate financial transactions for online content would be forced to censor user content to mitigate their legal exposure."
"Social casino apps are online games where users can buy virtual chips with real money but can't ever cash out their winnings. The plaintiffs argue that social casino apps violate various state gambling laws."
"Section 230 is the foundational law that has, since 1996, created legal breathing room for internet intermediaries to publish third-party content. Online speech is largely mediated by these private companies, allowing all of us to speak, access information, and engage in commerce online."
The EFF filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit, arguing against the loss of Section 230 immunity for app stores hosting social casino apps. These apps allow users to buy virtual chips but do not permit cashing out winnings. Plaintiffs claim these apps violate state gambling laws after spending significant amounts on them. The brief contends that if app stores lose immunity due to payment processing, it could force platforms to censor user content to avoid legal risks, threatening online speech and commerce.
Read at Electronic Frontier Foundation
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]