The US Supreme Court handed a victory to Twitter, Facebook and Google on Wednesday, saying the social media giants could not be held liable by victims of terrorist attacks for postings that endorsed the Islamic State group.
The court ruled that the platforms did not "aid and abet" IS terror attacks by hosting postings supportive of the extremist group.
"The fact that some bad actors took advantage of these platforms is insufficient to state a claim that defendants knowingly gave substantial assistance and thereby aided and abetted those wrongdoers' acts," the court said.
Also Read | Social media influencer creates her virtual clone for relationships at $1/minute. 1,000 individuals signup for service
Crucially, the cases against Google-owned YouTube and Twitter were seen as potential challenges to decades-old legal protections for tech companies.
But in their decision, the court indicated that the cases were not fit for that purpose to address the law.
The law, known as Section 230, gives internet platforms blanket immunity from any content that comes from a third party, even if it is pushed out as a recommendation by the website.
{{/usCountry}}The law, known as Section 230, gives internet platforms blanket immunity from any content that comes from a third party, even if it is pushed out as a recommendation by the website.
{{/usCountry}}But the justices of the Supreme Court largely evaded the debate, by saying that in any case, the allegations against YouTube and Twitter did not amount to a liable infraction and therefore the debate over section 230 was not pertinent.
Also Read | Twitter is purging inactive accounts including people who have died, angering those still grieving
"We therefore decline to address the application of Section 230 that appears to state little, if any, plausible claim for relief," they said.
The Supreme Court declines to hear the vast majority of the cases that come its way, and experts believed that by opting to decide on this one, there could be a willingness to modify the landmark law.
But in hearings in February, the justices largely expressed doubts that the case would be fit to begin a debate about reworking Section 230.