"The case is Gonzalez et. al v. Twitter, Inc., Google, Inc., and Facebook, Inc."
6/16/16, "Family of ISIS Paris attack victim sues Google, Facebook and Twitter," Washington Post, Jacob Bogage
"The family of an American student killed by the Islamic State during a
November 2015 attack in Paris is suing Twitter, Facebook and Google for
providing, “material support” to the terrorist group.
Nohemi
Gonzalez, 23, was the only American victim among 130 killed in
coordinated attacks at a Parisian soccer stadium and concert venue.
In
a complaint filed this week in the U.S. District Court of Northern
California, her father, Reynaldo Gonzalez, argues the three platforms
“have knowingly permitted the terrorist group ISIS to use their social
networks as a tool for spreading extremist propaganda, raising funds and
attracting new recruits.”
The
Islamic State, also known as ISIS, has active presences on both
Facebook and Twitter, though the platforms have cracked down in the past
and deactivated accounts affiliated with terrorist organizations.
Google
is named in the suit, filed this week, as the owner of YouTube, which
the Islamic State has used to post propaganda including videos of
executions.
“Google, Twitter and Facebook provide infrastructure
and material support for ISIS to conduct terrorist activity,” said Keith
Altman, attorney for the family. “These companies are not doing a good
enough job from keeping the terrorists from using their network.”
In
some cases, the complaint says, the social networks place ads next to
Islamic State content and share revenue with the terrorist group
generated from those ads.
The
platforms, though, could be shielded from the suit under provisions of
the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which does not hold websites liable
for content users post.
“[Social networks] can censor more or
less anything they want and it also have incredible abilities to leave
up as much as they want to leave up,” said Ryan Calo, professor of law
at the University of Washington and co-director of the school’s Tech
Policy Lab.
In a statement on its website, Facebook said there
was “no place for terrorists or content that promotes or supports
terrorism,” but also said the suit was “without merit” and pledged to
defend itself “vigorously.”
Twitter also said the suit was “without merit.”
“Violent
threats and the promotion of terrorism deserve no place on Twitter and,
like other social networks, our rules make that clear,” a spokesman
said.
Google declined to comment on pending litigation and
defended its “strong track record of taking swift action against
terrorist content.”
But Altman said the networks do far too little to police their users.
When a site deactivates one account, another pops back up to take its
place without much oversight.
“It’s like whack-a-mole,” he said. “I don't think ISIS could sustain their operation without these social networks.”
The first conference set for the case is in September.
The case is Gonzalez et. al v. Twitter, Inc., Google, Inc., and Facebook, Inc."
Images via Washington Post
==========
.................
No comments:
Post a Comment