The US Supreme Court rules in favour of tech giants in the face of victims of attacks

Before the U.S. Supreme Court. Washington, April 21, 2023. AP - Alex Brandon

Text by: RFI Follow

3 min

This is a file that was very followed in the American tech sector. Google, Facebook and Twitter cannot be prosecuted by victims of attacks who accuse them of helping the Islamic State group by relaying its propaganda, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

Advertising

Read more

The decision had the potential to change the face of the internet, reports our Washington correspondent, Guillaume Naudin. No doubt somewhat aware of the revolution it could have unleashed, the Supreme Court preferred to kick the can down the road. It unanimously rejected the complaints of two families of victims of Islamic State attacks.

The first: the parents of a young American woman killed in the November 2015 attacks in Paris. They filed a complaint against Google, which they accused of having supported the growth of the terrorist group by suggesting its videos to certain users. The other concerns an attack on a nightclub in Istanbul. Relatives of one victim believed that Facebook, Twitter and Googlecould be considered "complicit" in the attack, as their efforts to remove Islamic State content had not been sufficiently "vigorous".

«

The fact that bad actors take advantage of these platforms is not enough to ensure that the accused knowingly provided substantial assistance. " to jihadists, wrote Justice Clarence Thomas in the unanimous decision of the Court. He believes that "the allegations of the complainants are insufficient to establish that the accused helped IS to carry out its attack".

« A central aspect of internet law »

The judges' restraint has satisfied the tech industry and free speech advocates. "The court rightly acknowledged the limited scope of these cases and refused to rewrite a central aspect of internet law, protecting freedom of expression online and a thriving digital economy," Matt Schruers, president of trade association CCIA, told AFP. "Thanks to this ruling, freedom of expression online survives and will be able to face its new battles," Patrick Toomey of the powerful civil rights organization ACLU said in a statement.

Tech professionals were also pleased to see that the high court "declines" the invitation to look into "section 230". This law, dating from 1996, grants judicial immunity to digital companies for content posted on their platforms. An immunity defended body and soul by the big companies of Silicon Valley who believe that it is their status as hosts – and not publishers – that has allowed the rise of the internet.

If Section 230 is to be amended, it will not be amended by the Court, but shall be amended by law. Everyone finds it inappropriate and denounces it. Democrats believe it allows the spread of false information and Republicans that it exempts platforms from answering for their choices to delete accounts and promotes, according to them, censorship. This explains why no one has been able to agree on a reform so far.

(

With AFP)

Newsletter Receive all the international news directly in your mailbox

I subscribe

Follow all the international news by downloading the RFI application

Read on on the same topics:

• Justice
• United States
• Gafa
• Technologies