Google, TikTok Fight Potentially Harmful Video Claims

Google and TikTok are urging a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit over allegations that they failed to remove potentially harmful posts by users, including videos promoting dangerous activity.

In papers filed Friday with U.S. District Court Judge Virginia DeMarchi in San Jose, California, the companies say the case should be thrown out for numerous reasons -- including that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes web companies from liability over material uploaded by users.

“All claims are barred by Section 230, which prevents interactive communications services, including defendants, from being held liable for their editorial decisions to publish third-party content, whether allegedly harmful or not, including decisions whether or not to remove such content,” counsel for the companies argues in a joint motion. “This is a paradigmatic case for applying Section 230.”

The companies' papers come in response to a February 2023 lawsuit by parents who alleged their children were harmed as a result of content on the platforms, and by the Becca Schmill Foundation -- created by the family of 18-year-old Rebecca Mann Schmill who died of a fentanyl overdose after using social media to obtain drugs.

advertisement

advertisement

Parents of two children named in the case allege that they died after attempting “choking challenges” they had seen online. “Choking challenge” videos depict people strangling themselves until they pass out.

The plaintiffs' complaint includes claims Google and TikTok misrepresented that they removed content that violated their policies. The complaint also includes claims that the companies' products -- meaning their social media platforms -- are dangerously defective, and that the companies were negligent for failing to protect users from an “unreasonable risk of harm.”

Google and TikTok argue the case should be dismissed in its entirety due to Section 230.

“The essence of plaintiffs’ claims is their disagreement with defendants’ decisions about whether to publish third-party content: the supposed 'defect' or negligent act is failing to remove content,” the companies argue.

They also dispute that they can be sued for allegedly offering dangerously defective "products," arguing that such claims can only be brought against companies that offer physical goods, such as cars or pharmaceuticals.

“Plaintiffs here do not challenge a tangible 'product,'” the companies argue. “Instead, they target defendants’ processes for reviewing and taking down reported videos. That is a quintessential service.”

Next story loading loading..