Internet Law Commons^™

Taxing Ai, Assaf Harpaz

Scholarly Works

Artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to transform the distribution and sources of income, with some experts predicting widespread job displacement. Even under optimistic projections, AI is expected to exacerbate wealth inequality, given that the technology’s ownership and immense value are concentrated within a subset of Big Tech companies and AI startups. These outcomes will have far-reaching impacts on the federal tax system, which heavily relies on taxing individual labor income and payroll, rather than capital or consumption.

This Article argues that AI threatens to disrupt the tax system’s ability to fulfill its fundamental goals of raising revenue, redistributing income, and …

The Jawboning Cases End With A Bang Disguised By A Whimper, Derek E. Bambauer

UF Law Faculty Publications

Jawboning is government enforcement through informal channels, where the underlying authority is in doubt. Government actors at all levels have increasingly deployed this tactic to pressure Internet platforms to suppress disfavored speech. Internet jawboning debuted at the Supreme Court in two cases (National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo and Murthy v. Missouri) in 2023. Although the Court disposed of both cases on procedural and standing grounds, rather than offering a new methodology for evaluating jawboning, the opinions offer examples of what a successful jawboning claim looks like and what an unsuccessful claim lacks. Thus, jawboning as a …

Reply Brief For Petitioners, Gonzalez V. Google, 143 S.Ct. 1191 (2023) (No. 21-1333), Eric Schnapper, Robert J. Tolchin, Keith L. Altman

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED: Section 203(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act immunizes an “interactive computer service” (such as YouTube, Google, Facebook and Twitter) for “publish[ ing] ... information provided by another” “information content provider” (such as someone who posts a video on YouTube or a statement on Facebook). This is the most recent of three court of appeals’ decisions regarding whether section 230(c)(1) immunizes an interactive computer service when it makes targeted recommendations of information provided by such another party. Five courts of appeals judges have concluded that section 230(c)(1) creates such immunity. Three court of appeals judges have rejected such immunity. …

Brief For Respondents, Twitter, Inc. V. Taamneh, 143 S.Ct. 1206 (2023) (No. 21.1496), Eric Schnapper, Keith L. Altman, Robert J. Tolchin

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief For Petitioners, Gonzalez V. Google, 143 S.Ct. 1191 (2023) (No. 21-1333), Eric Schnapper, Robert J. Tolchin, Keith L. Altman

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED: Section 203(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act immunizes an “interactive computer service” (such as YouTube, Google, Facebook and Twitter) for “publish[ ing] ... information provided by another” “information content provider” (such as someone who posts a video on YouTube or a statement on Facebook). This is the most recent of three court of appeals’ decisions regarding whether section 230(c)(1) immunizes an interactive computer service when it makes targeted recommendations of information provided by such another party. Five courts of appeals judges have concluded that section 230(c)(1) creates such immunity. Three court of appeals judges have rejected such immunity. …

Big Tech Is Why I Have (Anti)Trust Issues, Sophie Copenhaver

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

“There is a cost to bigness, even if it’s not passed onto the consumer.” Antitrust laws were once an effective tool to break up companies that had grown too large. However, subsequent rulings have altered their original meaning, and they are no longer useful in regulating large technology companies such as Amazon, Facebook, and Google. This Note will argue that judicial interpretation of antitrust laws should no longer be governed by the consumer welfare standard. Rather, judges should apply a two-part test, focusing on the market power and any anticompetitive business practices of the defendant corporation.

Brief In Opposition, Twitter, Inc. V. Taamneh, 143 S.Ct. 1206 (2023) (No. 21.1496), Eric Schnapper, Keith L. Altman, Daniel W. Weininger

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Gonzalez V. Google, 143 S.Ct. 1191 (2023) (No. 21-1333), Eric Schnapper, Robert J. Tolchin, Keith L. Altman, Daniel Weininger

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED: Section 203(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act immunizes an “interactive computer service” (such as YouTube, Google, Facebook and Twitter) for “publish[ ing] ... information provided by another” “information content provider” (such as someone who posts a video on YouTube or a statement on Facebook). This is the most recent of three court of appeals’ decisions regarding whether section 230(c)(1) immunizes an interactive computer service when it makes targeted recommendations of information provided by such another party. Five courts of appeals judges have concluded that section 230(c)(1) creates such immunity. Three court of appeals judges have rejected such immunity. …

Book Review: This Is How They Tell Me The World Ends: The Cyberweapons Arms Race (2020) By Nicole Perlroth, Amy C. Gaudion

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

Freedom Of Expression V. Social Responsibility On The Internet: Vivi Down Association V. Google, Raphael Cohen-Almagor, Natalina Stamile

Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental, & Innovation Law

The aim of the article is to reflect on Google’s social responsibility by analyzing a milestone court decision, Vivi Down Association v. Google, that took place in Italy, involving the posting of an offensive video clip on Google Video. It was a landmark decision because it refuted the assertion that the Internet knows no boundaries, that the Internet transcends national laws due to its international nature, and that Internet intermediaries, such as Google, are above the law. This case shows that when the legal authorities of a given country decide to assert their jurisdiction, Internet companies need to abide by …

Bipa: What Does It Stand For?, Paige Smith

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deplatformed: Social Network Censorship, The First Amendment, And The Argument To Amend Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act, John A. Lonigro

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hybrid Ip Rights For Software, Apis, And Guis: Understanding Copyright's Paradigm Shift, Howard Skaist

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

The non-literal scope of protection for software is intricate legally and is intricate technical. Thus, despite literally decades of court decisions and a mountain of legal scholar written on the subject in that time, it appears that there is still no consistent agreement about it, as evidenced by the Google v. Oracle which has percolated in the courts for nearly a decade and is now being heard by the US Supreme Court (oral argument was on October 7, 2020). However, the thesis of this article that a legal construct is capable of being formulated that is analytically consistent and that …

Bad Actors: Authenticity, Inauthenticity, Speech, And Capitalism, Sarah C. Haan

Scholarly Articles

“Authenticity” has evolved into an important value that guides social media companies’ regulation of online speech. It is enforced through rules and practices that include real-name policies, Terms of Service requiring users to present only accurate information about themselves, community guidelines that prohibit “coordinated inauthentic behavior,” verification practices, product features, and more.

This Article critically examines authenticity regulation by the social media industry, including companies’ claims that authenticity is a moral virtue, an expressive value, and a pragmatic necessity for online communication. It explains how authenticity regulation provides economic value to companies engaged in “information capitalism,” “data capitalism,” and “surveillance …

Trimming The Fat: The Gdpr As A Model For Cleaning Up Our Data Usage, Kassandra Polanco

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

From Innovation To Abuse: Does The Internet Still Need Section 230 Immunity?, Benjamin Volpe

Catholic University Law Review

In 1996, Congress passed the Communications Decency Act to allow the screening of offensive material from the internet, while preserving the continued development of the internet economy without burdensome regulation. However, for years, online intermediaries have successfully used the Act as a shield from liability when third parties use their online services to commit tortious or criminal acts. This Comment argues that a wholly-unregulated internet is no longer necessary to preserve the once-fledgling internet economy. After evaluating various approaches to intermediary liability, this Comment also argues that Congress should take a more comprehensive look at consumer protection online and establish …

Privacy And Legal Automation: The Dmca As A Case Study, Jonathon Penney

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Advances in artificial intelligence, machine learning, computing capacity, and big data analytics are creating exciting new possibilities for legal automation. At the same time, these changes pose serious risks for civil liberties and other societal interests. Yet, existing scholarship is narrow, leaving uncertainty on a range of issues, including a glaring lack of systematic empirical work as to how legal automation may impact people’s privacy and freedom. This article addresses this gap with an original empirical analysis of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which today sits at the forefront of algorithmic law due to its automated enforcement of copyright …

Territorialization Of The Internet Domain Name System, Marketa Trimble

Pepperdine Law Review

Territorialization of the internet—the linking of the internet to physical geography—is a growing trend. Internet users have become accustomed to the conveniences of localized advertising, have enjoyed location-based services, and have witnessed an increasing use of geolocation and geoblocking tools by service and content providers who—for various reasons— either allow or block access to internet content based on users’ physical locations. This article analyzes whether, and if so how, the trend toward territorialization has affected the internet Domain Name System (DNS). As a hallmark of cyberspace governance that aimed to be detached from the territorially-partitioned governance of the physical world, …

The “Sovereigns Of Cyberspace” And State Action: The First Amendment’S Application (Or Lack Thereof) To Third-Party Platforms, Jonathan Peters

Scholarly Works

Many scholars have commented that the state action doctrine forecloses use of the First Amendment to constrain the policies and practices of online service providers. But few have comprehensively studied this issue, and the seminal article exploring “[c]yberspace and the [s]tate [a]ction [d]ebate” is fifteen years old, published before the U.S. Supreme Court reformulated the federal approach to state action. It is important to give the state action doctrine regular scholarly attention, not least because it is increasingly clear that “the private sector has a shared responsibility to help safeguard free expression.” It is critical to understand whether the First …

The Right To Be Forgotten, Lisa Owings

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This Article advocates a new test for balancing free speech and privacy interests online. There should be a three-prong test for whether, and under what circumstances, a user may request deletion of online data under the right to be forgotten. First, if the information is the publication of a private fact that is offensive to a reasonable person and not newsworthy, it should never be published unless the individual chooses to do so. Second, if individuals posted the information about themselves or as an expression of their opinion, they should have the right to remove it. This should apply not …

You(Tube), Me, And Content Id: Paving The Way For Compulsory Synchronization Licensing On User-Generated Content Platforms, Nicholas Thomas Delisa

Brooklyn Law Review

The changing landscape of digital media technology makes it increasingly difficult for owners of copyrighted music to monitor how their works are being exploited across the Internet. This is especially true of user-generated content (UGC) platforms—websites and applications such as Facebook, YouTube, and Snapchat, where content is created or uploaded predominantly by users. These services pose a special problem to copyright owners because, instead of content being uploaded from a single source that is easily sued and has deep pockets, content is uploaded by users. Users are a troublesome group because they are innumerable, sometimes anonymous, and mostly click on …

Fashion Forward: The Need For A Proactive Approach To The Counterfeit Epidemic, Casey Tripoli

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

In the last two decades, the overall activity of the counterfeit market has expanded and risen 10,000 percent. This dramatic shift corresponds to growth of the Internet, which has unified the fascination of obtaining cheap, illegitimate goods with the efficiency of a mouse click. With the expected continued inflation of the counterfeit market comes a host of new concerns, namely, how to determine who is responsible for the distribution of these knockoffs, and who should be ordained to limit them in the marketplace. In both the United States and the European Union, however, outdated laws produce a mélange of inadequate …

Privacy Almighty? The Cjeu's Judgment In Google Spain Sl V. Aepd, David J. Stute

Michigan Journal of International Law

The Internet has matured into an unprecedented repository of data, retrievable through myriad unique “links,” or Uniform Resource Locators. Yet, this wealth of information only became broadly accessible through the invention and continual development of algorithm-based search engines. Keyword searches empowered search-engine users to find—and sometimes stumble upon—information with great ease. Indeed, search-engine indices arguably have become the most comprehensive catalogues of information the world has ever seen. This wealth of accessible information poses challenges to traditional notions of privacy: aspects of our private and public lives, which previously would have rarely left the vicinities of our immediate social or …

Aereo, In-Line Linking, And A New Approach To Copyright Infringement For Emerging Technologies, Shannon Mcgovern

Catholic University Law Review

In an ever-changing technological landscape, strictly adhering to the language and definitions of the Copyright Act in cases involving emerging technologies may contravene the purpose and intent of copyright law. However, the Supreme Court’s 2014 opinion in American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo Inc. puts forth a commercial interest rationale that suggests copyright infringers may no longer be able to avoid liability based on perceived technological loopholes that have typically absolved online infringers of infringement liability. This Note argues that Aereo’s commercial interest rationale paves the way for a new approach to technologically complex copyright cases, particularly where in-line linking …

At The Fontier Of The Younger Doctrine: Reflections On Google V. Hood, Gil Seinfeld

Articles

On December 19, 2014, long-simmering tensions between Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood and the search engine giant Google boiled over into federal court when Google filed suit against the Attorney General to enjoin him from bringing civil or criminal charges against it for alleged violations of the Mississippi Consumer Protection Act. Hood had been investigating and threatening legal action against Google for over a year for its alleged failure to do enough to prevent its search engine, advertisements, and YouTube website from facilitating public access to illegal, dangerous, or copyright protected goods. The case has garnered a great deal of …

Beyond Technophobia: Lawyers’ Ethical And Legal Obligations To Monitor Evolving Technology And Security Risks, Timothy J. Toohey

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Lawyers and technology have an uneasy relationship. Although some lawyers are early adapters, others take pride in ignoring technology because they believe it is alien to the practice of law. As Jody R. Westby observed, lawyers confronted with technology and security issues tend to have their “eyes glaze over” and “want to call in their ‘IT guy’ and go back to work.” But this technophobic attitude may no longer just be harmless conservatism. In the world of growing security risks, ignorance of technology may lead to violations of lawyers’ fundamental ethical duties of competence and confidentiality.

Speech Engines, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Academic and regulatory debates about Google are dominated by two opposing theories of what search engines are and how law should treat them. Some describe search engines as passive, neutral conduits for websites’ speech; others describe them as active, opinionated editors: speakers in their own right. The conduit and editor theories give dramatically different policy prescriptions in areas ranging from antitrust to copyright. But they both systematically discount search users’ agency, regarding users merely as passive audiences.

A better theory is that search engines are not primarily conduits or editors, but advisors. They help users achieve their diverse and individualized …

Speech Engines, James Grimmelmann

Faculty Scholarship

Academic and regulatory debates about Google are dominated by two opposing theories of what search engines are and how law should treat them. Some describe search engines as passive, neutral conduits for websites’ speech; others describe them as active, opinionated editors: speakers in their own right. The conduit and editor theories give dramatically different policy prescriptions in areas ranging from antitrust to copyright. But they both systematically discount search users’ agency, regarding users merely as passive audiences.

A better theory is that search engines are not primarily conduits or editors, but advisors. They help users achieve their diverse and individualized …

Electronic Privacy Information Center V. National Security Agency: How Glomar Responses Benefit Businesses And Provide An Epic Blow To Individuals, Joshua R. Chazen

Journal of Business & Technology Law

No abstract provided.

After Search Neutrality: Drawing A Line Between Promotion And Demotion, Daniel A. Crane

Articles

The Federal Trade Commission's (“FTC” or “the commission”) January 3, 2013 decision to close its longstanding investigation of Google1 brings to a close a flurry of discussion over the possibility that Google could become subject to a “search neutrality” principle in the United States. Although the Commission found against Google on several grounds, it rejected petitions from Google's critics to create a search neutrality principle as a matter of antitrust law. This essay briefly analyzes what remains of U.S. antitrust scrutiny of Internet search bias after the Google settlement. In particular, it suggests that a sensible line can be drawn …