They're alleging product liability, fraud and deceptive business practices, according to an amended complaint filed on March 31. ![]() It was found not liable in a suit filed by a man who was arrested for a sexual encounter with a minor he met on the app.īut in Herrick's case, attorneys Carrie Goldberg and Tor Ekeland are relying on different laws. In 2015, Grindr used the CDA to prevail in another case. Companies are supposed to act in good faith to protect users. It's a unique legal protection that gives a broad layer of immunity to online companies from being held liable for user-generated content. ![]() Mackey said the answers have big implications.Īs with many complaints against tech platforms, Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act is at play in the Grindr case.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |