"Mr Forrest's legal team is asking a judge to rule that Meta cannot hide behind Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields internet firms from being accountable for content posted by users on its platform."
"The jury concluded that Meta and YouTube were negligent in the design and operation of their platforms, and that their negligence was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff's harm."
"Mr Forrest's lawyers are using a similar legal tactic to navigate around Section 230, accusing Meta's ad business and its tools of being complicit in the creation and distribution of the bogus marketing messages."
Andrew Forrest is pursuing legal action against Meta in a US federal court, seeking accountability for scam ads that misuse his likeness. His legal team argues that Meta should not be protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. A recent hearing examined whether Meta improperly discarded evidence, which could affect its defense. Meta contends that it is not responsible for the ads and asserts it made efforts to preserve relevant data. This case could set a precedent regarding the limits of Section 230 in advertising contexts.
Read at Abc
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]