Blog

Today, PPI submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in the case of Gonzalez v. Google. The brief highlights the potential risks to America’s digital economy under the circumstances of a ruling against Google, considering the implications of changes to what falls under the liability protections provided to online platforms through Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. Though there is certainly room for reform to Section 230 to better reflect the harms associated with the modern internet, efforts to do so must tread carefully and be targeted to specific harms to avoid destabilizing the digital economy.

The brief highlights the following points:

1.  “The digital economy, fortified by Section 230, is critical to the American economy.”

The digital economy is an enormous creator of American jobs, thus, significant changes to the fundamental legal regime through which that economy operates risks the stability of a robust industry. This is also a sector that has proven otherwise stable in the face of pandemic shutdowns and periods of high inflation.

2. “Algorithmic recommendation is critical to the digital economy.”

Action against curated algorithms will have impacts that reverberate through the economy. They are the fundamental mechanism behind a variety of business models that empower both online entrepreneurship and the use of access to information for consumers. Potential changes to liability protections for algorithms would also be misguided from a technological standpoint, as algorithms of varying complexity are the means through which all online platforms sort third-party content.

3. “Section 230 reform is warranted, but that reform should be the result of careful, holistic policymaking.” 

Given the significance of online platforms in Americans’ everyday lives, changes to Section 230 must be made with great intentionality. Internet policy should be made by Congress, not the courts. There is a need to address issues posed by dangerous online content, but a catch-all approach may result in significant unintended consequences.

PPI’s full amicus brief can be read here.