Posted on 04/16/2018 11:02:21 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
A lawyer for victims of terrorist attacks in Israel on Monday urged a federal appeals court to revive their lawsuit against Facebook Inc, saying Mark Zuckerberg’s congressional testimony undermined the social media company’s argument that it bore no responsibility for content on its platforms.
Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, “severely contradicted critical factual positions” that the company took to win dismissal last May of the $3 billion lawsuit by victims and relatives of American victims of Hamas attacks, according to a filing with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.
“The district court was presented with, and made its decision based on, fake news,” the filing said.
Facebook did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
According to Monday’s filing, Zuckerberg repeatedly admitted in his testimony that the Menlo Park, California-based company is “responsible for the content” on its platforms.
The filing also quoted Zuckerberg’s testimony that Facebook had a responsibility to ensure that its tools were “used for good,” and that “terrorist propaganda” qualified as “clearly bad activity” that should be reduced.
“What emerges from Zuckerberg’s testimony is a picture differing markedly from the one painted before the district court,” the filing said. “It is not simply a ‘hands off’ publisher of other people’s content.”
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
fyi
YES, Fakebook (and all social media companies) are on the horns of this legal dilemma: if they want to censor and moderate the content posted then they cannot (plausibly) claim that they are merely a wide open public platform that anyone might post on. They are taking some degree of responsibility for their “content” and so they will face more of these legal claims seeking to make them accountable.
The world got a “free” look at little Mark on his booster seat.
The jury will eat him alive.
This is a very scarey concept to support. If you hold facebook responsible for everything that everyone posts on it, then what is to stop free republic from behing held responsible for anything that anyone ever posted on it?
Zuckface would not understand but having that case reinstated and FB losing would be the best possible outcome for FB... They would be the “open to everyone” platform they proclaim themselves to be and avoid the fate of it’s predecessors like MySpace.
If you hold facebook responsible for everything that everyone posts on it...
***********
Wrong perspective... WE don’t hold FB responsible ,, ZUCK is putting himself in that position. They have demonstrated that they can perform the task of muzzling any speech a gov’t wants quashed on demand... however they willfully ignore muslim threats to not offend Merkel and others.
“If you hold facebook responsible for everything that everyone posts on it, then what is to stop free republic from behing held responsible for anything that anyone ever posted on it?”
Ask Craigslist.
L
He’s a fool, and not the first fool who happened to get wealthy in spite of himself.
FR does indeed bear SOME responsibility for everything posted. That’s the reason for the FR CopyrightList, and why FR has been involved in legal disputes.
“This is a very scarey concept to support.”
This is a shakedown.
They are shaking an American company for money, and American freedoms for their own ideological needs.
—but mainly the money.
Never doubt that...
They're not looking for terrorism. They're looking for 'right-wing hate speech'.
This is the Facebook Is Evil ping list.
If you'd like to be on or off this list, please click Private Reply below and drop me a FReepmail.
That is why I asked JimRob for permission before starting the Facebook Is Evil ping list.
I see this very differently than you. Zuckerberg actually said Facebook is responsible for its contents.
I see this very differently than you. Zuckerberg actually said Facebook is responsible for its contents.
~~~~
I’ve heard he is supposed to be very intelligent too. I have to question it if he actually said this. Something tells me that he only said it in order to help legitimize the systemic censorship that I’ve been hearing has been coming down the pike from Youtube and Facebook recently, but if you switch yourself from being a service provider of content to being considered a publisher and be held responsible for all of your content created by billions of members, that’s untenable. Actual publishers in the media have editorial staff who are responsible for vetting their content.
I get what you guys are saying. This guy can’t have it both ways. I just think that he is picking the wrong one if he wants to say they are going to be responsible for it all
I sure hope this is revived, the Judge should first hold Zuckerberg and His Lawyers in Contempt and remand them into custody for Fraud upon the Court, referral to the US Attorney for Criminal Charges, referral to the BAR fo0r Permanent Disbarment. Then Reinstate the Lawsuit.
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.