Technology companies largely avoid the legal consequences of their technology despite the hate speech, financial fraud, and impact on elections, thanks to a law that protects them from lawsuits, but this law is now facing a new challenge from Houston's personal injury lawyer, Annie McAdams.

In his New York Times report, writer Jack Nicas said McAdams had launched a legal attack against Facebook and other technology companies, accusing them of facilitating sex trafficking of minors.

In a series of lawsuits in California, Georgia, Missouri and Texas, she has used a new argument to challenge the 1996 law, specifically section 230, which states that Internet companies are not responsible for what their users publish.

In contrast, McAdams argues that if pimps use Facebook and Instagram to attract children into prostitution, separate laws require Facebook to warn users of this danger and do more to prevent it.

The writer said that the McAdams case is one of the changes in the law today. Facebook asked Stephen Kirkland, a Houston judge, to dismiss two of the lawsuits filed by McAdams against the company because of its immunity under article 230. Company.

Facebook's response to the Houston judge's decision came in the form of a nearly 50-page petition to the Texas Court of Appeal stating that Judge Kirkland had erred in his decision and that the company never tolerates any behavior or content that exploits children on the site. Advanced technology is used to fight this behavior aggressively and to protect children.

The lawyer was encouraged to bring the lawsuit when she saw Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg recall that he was responsible for the content on his site (Getty Images)

The writer added that the McAdams method may be important. Jeff Kosev, who has written a book on article 230, believes that if Texas judgments rely on appeals, they can persuade judges in other states to consider the matter.

Thus, judges have begun to allow such claims to overcome article 230, which may mean that many companies will be held liable for damages on their sites.

On Facebook, McAdams predicted the jury would give its clients billions of dollars.

The writer stated that McAdams first filed lawsuits against the hotels where the pimps were lodged. Then when interviewing potential clients, the lawyer noticed that almost all the girls met pimps on Facebook or Instagram, but she was not quite sure how to build the case against them, until she saw Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg mention that he was responsible for the content on his site.

McAdams' s lawsuit accuses Facebook of violating sex trafficking laws and product liability in Texas, and argues that her case revolves around what Facebook has not done to protect its users. She believes Facebook can ask users to verify their identities or prevent adults from reaching out to minors.

In addition to the three lawsuits filed by Facebook against Texas in Texas and the lawsuit filed in Tennessee, it has filed a lawsuit against Sales Force in Texas, California and St. Louis, accusing the commercial software company of helping a prostitution site to do business.

Now, McAdams and her adviser, David Harris, plan to sue other large technical and financial companies for their role in sex trafficking.