This is the remand of the troubling Ninth Circuit Section 230 decision in Bride v. YOLO. As you may recall, the plaintiffs claims that YOLO made statements about its content moderation and the safety of its environment that the plaintiffs believe were not true; and based on that, YOLO should be liable for users’ physical and emotional harms. In its prior ruling, the Ninth Circuit said that Section 230 doesn’t apply to promise-based claims. That ruling allowed the plaintiffs to proceed against YOLO even though YOLO’s challenged statements clearly never made any enforceable promises. YOLO stopped paying its lawyers and stopped fighting in court, so it defaulted in the case. That makes me wonder who can pay off any judgments against YOLO if YOLO is already gone? Either way, the plaintiffs are proceeding without any opposition from YOLO. And yet…their case is so unmeritorious that the plaintiffs can’t get an unopposed default judgment. Obviously defective cases are what the Ninth Circuit…
No comments yet. Log in to reply on the Fediverse. Comments will appear here.