Skip to main content

Amazon fends off greenwashing lawsuit after SCOTUS refuses to hear case

By
A large Amazon logo sign on the side of a warehouse.

The highest court in the land has declined to hear a case brought up from the lower circuit courts early this year involving online retail giant Amazon and its protections under Section 230.

Amazon was sued by Planet Green Cartridges, a U.S. re-manufacturer of printer cartridges, for allowing third- party companies to advertise and sell falsely labelled products claiming to be re-manufactured or recycled. Re-manufacturing is considered a more sustainable manufacturing process, reducing raw material and energy consumption by restoring products to manufacturer standards.

SEE ALSO: Black Friday 2025: Get live updates on the latest sales, doorbusters, and deal drops

Planet Green Cartridges sought $500 million in third-party liability damages from Amazon based on the recommendation of greenwashed products. The lawsuit argued that Amazon's algorithm promoted listings that falsely advertised new, imported cartridges, raking in $3 billion in sales and creating unfair competition among sellers as customers were deceived by false advertising into purchasing less sustainable products.

Amazon's counterargument hinged on online merchandiser protections outlined in Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects internet service hosts from government regulation and shields them from legal liability for the content their users post. It is considered by many to be a tentpole of a free and open internet.

Following several conflicting lower court decisions, the case was dismissed by the 9th Circuit court in March, stating that Amazon couldn't be held liable for the claims written by third-party sellers. Planet Green Cartridges then petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case and clarify whether Section 230 protections extend to online marketplaces that also profit from the recommendation, promotion, or distribution of products on their website — as Amazon does — in addition to hosting the listings.

Section 230 and online censorship have become hot button topics in the U.S., especially as social media platforms have mostly backed off from content moderation. Increasingly powerful, AI-enhanced algorithms have complicated the matter. In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard two Section 230 cases brought against YouTube and Twitter (now X), which argued the social media companies should be held accountable for aiding and abetting terrorism through their algorithmic feeds. The court dismissed the complaint against Google, YouTube's parent company, and ruled in favor of Twitter's Section 230 protections.



from Mashable https://ift.tt/MItp5sg
via IFTTT
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Instagram accidentally reinstated Pornhub’s banned account

By
After years of on-and-off temporary suspensions, Instagram permanently banned Pornhub’s account in September. Then, for a short period of time this weekend, the account was reinstated. By Tuesday, it was permanently banned again. “This was done in error,” an Instagram spokesperson told TechCrunch. “As we’ve said previously, we permanently disabled this Instagram account for repeatedly violating our policies.” Instagram’s content guidelines prohibit  nudity and sexual solicitation . A Pornhub spokesperson told TechCrunch, though, that they believe the adult streaming platform’s account did not violate any guidelines. Instagram has not commented on the exact reasoning for the ban, or which policies the account violated. It’s worrying from a moderation perspective if a permanently banned Instagram account can accidentally get switched back on. Pornhub told TechCrunch that its account even received a notice from Instagram, stating that its ban had been a mistake (that message itse...
Post a Comment
Read more

Watch Aidy Bryant *completely* lose it as 'SNL' roasts political pundits

By
On Saturday Night Live , there are breaks and then there's whatever happened here. The Season 45 premiere featured a sketch that was meant to expose the empty noisemaking of political punditry on TV. But part of the joke involved a series of quick costume changes, and some weirdness during one of those switches led to a complete and total breakdown. Aidy Bryant, the segment's host, couldn't take it. She manages to keep it together until what appears to be an accidental wide shot exposes some of the magic as we see a woman who's probably a member of the SNL wardrobe crew fiddling with Aidy's costume. Read more... More about Saturday Night Live , Aidy Bryant , Entertainment , and Movies Tv Shows from Mashable https://ift.tt/2okrAOq via IFTTT
Post a Comment
Read more

California Gov. Newsom vetoes bill SB 1047 that aims to prevent AI disasters

By
California Gov. Gavin Newsom has vetoed bill SB 1047, which aims to prevent bad actors from using AI to cause "critical harm" to humans. The California state assembly passed the legislation by a margin of 41-9 on August 28, but several organizations including the Chamber of Commerce had urged Newsom to veto the bill . In his veto message on Sept. 29, Newsom said the bill is "well-intentioned" but "does not take into account whether an Al system is deployed in high-risk environments, involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data. Instead, the bill applies stringent standards to even the most basic functions - so long as a large system deploys it."  SB 1047 would have made the developers of AI models liable for adopting safety protocols that would stop catastrophic uses of their technology. That includes preventive measures such as testing and outside risk assessment, as well as an "emergency stop" that would completely shut down...
Post a Comment
Read more