Contrary to the usual Republican political advocacy agenda, which is good for business and trade interests, a GOP-led House of Representatives could lead to more federal regulation and greater control over big tech.
Some legal changes could follow the current session of the US Supreme Court, which will consider whether social media platforms can be held liable for the content of creators.
Judges will hear oral arguments on these issues in a number of cases over the next month. González Google vs. and Twitter vs. Taamni draws attention from the legal community and Republican lawmakers as the court considers the implications of Section 230(c)(1) for the first time. The Communications Decency Act generally protects online hosts, including social media companies, from being sued for content posted by their users.
According to a letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to Big Tech, Republicans generally oppose the provision and seek to hold Big Tech accountable to the Biden administration for its suppression of free speech online. leaders in the last month.
Shari Lewis, a partner and a member of Rivkin Radler's privacy, data and cyber rights group, said she expects the bill to replace Section 230 in the House of Representatives this year.
“Republicans want to do this with technology providers, especially Meta, Twitter, etc. They see it as very protectionist for big platforms like Facebook because it completely isolates them from responsibility for the content on their platforms and the impact of their content on politics ., child safety and many other issues,” said Lewis.
“Republicans argue that the decisions ISPs [ISPs] make to promote or vote for certain content make ISPs content providers and not just publishers. Some Democrats also argue that Section 230, passed at the dawn of the internet age to protect a fledgling industry, could be pushed too far and should be repealed. On the other hand, there are First Amendment issues that remain when ISPs are held liable for their "editorial" decisions or lack of decisions."
In any case, big changes are coming.
"We appear to be at a tipping point where there could be significant changes in relevant case law that could affect the Section 230 legislative debate," said Jonathan Cohen, financial partner at Wilkinson Barker Knauer. This was reported to Law.com from Washington.
“230 Any changes in the interpretation of the article or in the ability of states to mandate content moderation practices could have repercussions beyond online platforms. These changes could affect the internet ecosystem, including more traditional telecom and media companies.”
The Republican Legislature is also considering federal legislation that would create national standards and safeguards for personal information collected by companies.
The bipartisan US Privacy and Security Act has been approved by the House Energy and Trade Committee. Though Congress won't pass the law until late 2022, it marks progress toward a comprehensive privacy law in the US and is a growing trend that calls for federal regulation of artificial intelligence, according to a recent article. Lawyers Mayer Brown Niketa. Patel, Tori Shinohara, Jennifer Rose, Brendan Harrington, Arsen Kurinyan, and Howard Waltzman.
"Given Republicans' general opposition to federal regulations, many intuitively see the need for a national privacy law that pre-empts state laws as a general proposition that many Republicans support," Rivkin Radler's Lewis said.
“There are currently five states with comprehensive but often conflicting privacy laws, as well as state privacy notices and industry-specific privacy laws. Today, when even the smallest companies do business in multiple physical locations, they find it difficult to comply with numerous, often conflicting laws. "Republicans will support a single privacy standard that eliminates this inconsistency and provides a predictable privacy framework."
California's privacy law, which went into effect in January 2023, generally prioritizes consumer rights over business interests, Lewis said.
"Federal law will certainly be more respected by business than existing state laws," he said.
President Joe Biden signed the Critical Infrastructure Cyber Incident Notification Act of 2022, which includes new obligations to report certain cyber incidents to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency within 72 hours, as well as an obligation to report ransom payments within 24 hours . .
The reporting requirements will come into effect once CISA completes the rule development process, said Meg Kammerud, general counsel at cybersecurity firm Dragos.
"I hope the right decision is made to report incidents and educate the public about these risks, especially when it comes to critical infrastructure, but it gives organizations the ability to understand if there really was an incident, what the Nature of incident equals incident. . and what could the report be. "Plan to resolve the incident before publicity begins," he said.
"The Government is keen not only to know that these events are taking place, but also to work with industry to understand, collaborate and respond to the events."
