In the brief, ACLU, EFF, CDT, Freedom of the Press Foundation, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, Progressive Policy Institute, Fight for the Future, and Public Knowledge argue that the law directly restricts users’ protected speech and association and imposes a prior restraint that will make it impossible for users to speak, access information, and associate through TikTok. The brief makes clear that national security interests do not diminish protections afforded by the First Amendment and that courts must impose the same rigorous standards to laws that restrict speech. It further argues that the D.C. Circuit misapplied strict scrutiny when it failed to significantly examine the government’s vague and non-specific national security justifications for enacting the statute.  In light of the law’s sweeping ban on free expression, the coalition’s brief argues that the court should block implementation of the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act.

Read the full brief.

The post CDT Joins Amicus Brief as the Supreme Court Prepare to Review the Federal TikTok Ban appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

The brief argues that the Circuit’s decision is contrary to the text of Section 230, reasonable rulings of other circuits, and decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. The amicus brief also argues that not protecting platforms’ editorial choices would render Section 230(c)(1) immunity virtually meaningless, allowing plaintiffs to make an end-run around the statute and undermining Congress’ policy goal of incentivizing internet intermediaries to facilitate third-party speech at scale.

Finally, the brief argues that the ruling, if left to stand, would ultimately harm users’ free expression rights by incentivizing platforms to censor third-party speech, threatening the open internet and the unique ability of anyone with an internet connection to communicate with others around the world cheaply, easily, and quickly.

Read the full brief.

The post CDT Joins Amicus Brief Urging Rehearing in Anderson v. TikTok appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

Section 230 plays a critical role in ensuring users’ ability to freely communicate and find the information they need online, but is not an absolute bar to liability claims, including product liability claims. Product liability lawsuits are often grounded in the duty that a particular manufacturer or service provider owes to its customers. 

The brief explains that Section 230 does not preclude product liability for claims when those claims would not seek to impose a duty on the ICS to moderate, monitor, or otherwise prevent user-generated content. Appropriate parsing of product liability claims’ relationship to the publication of user-generated content, as recommended by CDT’s brief, can simultaneously protect users’ ability to freely express themselves, while also empowering them to seek redress when harmed by an ICS’s faulty design. 

Read the full amicus brief.

The post CDT Files Amicus Brief Explaining the Appropriate Role of Section 230 in Products Liability Litigation appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

CDT’s Tech Talk is a podcast where we dish on tech and Internet policy, while also explaining what these policies mean to our daily lives. You can find Tech Talk on Spotify, SoundCloud, iTunes, and Google Podcasts, as well as Stitcher and TuneIn.

On February 26, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton, two pivotal cases that could alter the landscape of free expression on the internet. 

In this episode, we sat down with CDT’s Director of the Free Expression Project, Kate Ruane, and Vice President of the Center for Civil Rights and Technology,  K.J. Bagchi to discuss the two cases that are challenging the constitutionality of the controversial Texas and Florida social media laws.

Listen

(CDT relies on the generosity of donors like you. If you enjoyed this episode of Tech Talk, you can support it and our work at CDT by going to cdt.org/techtalk. Thank you for putting democracy and individual rights at the center of the digital revolution.)

The post Tech Talk: Talking Tech with Kate Ruane & K.J. Bagchi on Moody v. NetChoice & NetChoice v. Paxton appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

This a critical piece of legislation that would provide essential resources to law enforcement to protect children online, as well as resources to better support victims of child sexual abuse.

Read the full letter + list of signatories.

The post CDT Joins Letter Endorsing the Invest in Child Safety Act appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

CDT and EFF’s brief argues the lower court was correct in its decision to enjoin the law on the basis of its overbroad and unconstitutional age-verification and censorship requirements, but was wrong to simultaneously, and superfluously, hold that the privacy protections in the AADC, if stripped of their concerning aspects, were unconstitutional. 

The brief argues that, first, the appeals court should narrow the decision to enjoin the AADC and focus primarily on the unconstitutional age-verification and censorship requirements. Second, the brief argues that, if the court declines to take that narrower approach, the privacy provisions in AADC, viewed independently of the age verification and content restrictions, are constitutional because they pass intermediate scrutiny as a regulation of commercial speech.

Read the full amicus brief.

Read more from EFF on this brief.

The post CDT Joins EFF in NetChoice v. Bonta Amicus Brief appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

CDT’s brief argues that the court should allow CDL because libraries are much better at protecting reader privacy than are commercial lenders, like Libby. Libraries have a long tradition of ensuring that people’s lending history is protected, whereas commercial lenders often collect significant amounts of data about people including, for instance, titles of books read, passages highlighted, how long it takes a person to read a book, what words the person had to look up, and potentially thousands of other private data points. 

Improved reader privacy is crucial for freedom of expression and freedom to access information. If people know they are being watched, they are much less likely to access (potentially controversial) information. That is particularly important in an age where books are being banned in schools, and students may wish to seek those titles at their local library. Without CDL, that information may go straight to publishers and other commercial lenders, and from there to data brokers or other third parties.

Read the full brief.

The post CDT Files Amicus Brief in Hachette v. Internet Archive, in Support of Controlled Digital Lending Efforts and Readers’ Privacy appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

***

From the letter:

The eSafety Commissioner has publicly stated that it supports privacy and security, and does not advocate building in weaknesses or back doors to undermine end-to-end encrypted services. (5) But client-side scanning fundamentally undermines encryption’s promise and principle of private and secure communications and personal file storage. We urge the Commissioner against creating standards that would force encrypted services to implement such scanning measures as they would create an unreasonable and disproportionate risk of harm to individuals and communities.

Australia is a leader in the field of online safety policy making, and this position comes with responsibility in shaping the norms and direction of international internet governance and regulation. Proceeding with the standards as drafted would signal to other countries that online safety is somehow counterposed to privacy and security, when the opposite is true.

We strongly urge the eSafety Commissioner to amend the proposed industry standards to ensure the protection of privacy and security, and urge the Australian Government to commit to the ongoing protection and strengthening of encryption, privacy and digital security.

Read the full letter + list of signatories.

The post CDT Joins Civil Society Coalition Calling on Australian Government to Reconsider Threats to Encryption, Privacy in Draft Online Safety Industry Standards appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

In our amicus brief supporting NetChoice, we describe the process by which platforms create content policies regarding what content is and is not allowed on their services, continuously iterate on those policies, and implement processes to enforce those policies to foster the type of environment they wish to create. We argue that platforms’ content moderation activities are editorial processes deserving of the highest level of First Amendment protection.

We then argue that the provisions of the Texas and Florida laws that would require platforms to change their content moderation rules or continue to host user content that they otherwise would not violate platforms’ First Amendment-protected right to exercise editorial discretion by engaging in content moderation.

Read the full brief.

The post CDT Files Amicus Brief in NetChoice v. Moody and NetChoice v. Paxton, Challenging TX & FL Social Media Laws appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.

This is the August 2023 issue of the Centre for Democracy & Technology Europe‘s monthly Tech Policy Brief. It highlights some of the most pressing technology and internet policy issues under debate in Europe, the U.S., and internationally, and gives CDT’s perspective on them. Our aim is to help shape policies that advance our rights in a digital world. Please do not hesitate to contact our team in Brussels: Iverna McGowan, Asha Allen, and Ophélie Stockhem.

CDT Europe Raises Concerns Over Warrantless Digital Searches in CSA Regulation

In a new op-ed, CDT Europe Director Iverna McGowan raised the alarm at the flawed logic of the European Commission’s proposal to prevent and combat child sexual abuse online. She raised strong concerns about the risks the law poses to fundamental rights and the rule of law, which could undermine the very goal the proposed law seeks to achieve – fighting child sexual abuse and keeping children safe online.

McGowan underlined that the proposed regulation would introduce a system of warrantless searches of online communications, meaning that all users’ private messages would be surveilled, not due to suspected involvement in child sexual abuse but simply due to use of a service such as Whatsapp or Signal. Warrantless digital searches, coupled with the proposal’s overreliance on error-prone and unfeasible detection technologies, could result in content being wrongfully flagged to law enforcement, with life-altering consequences for those involved.

This approach, warned McGowan, runs counter to several basic tenets of criminal law: prominently, the need for a warrant based on reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing before initiating a search, and the presumption of innocence. In order to bring the proposal in line with human rights law, and protect the most vulnerable children, McGowan stressed the need to fundamentally move away from the proposed system, in favour of one that would incorporate carefully crafted detection warrants overseen by independent judicial bodies.

Civil Society Demands Clarification from EU Commissioner on Possible Internet Shutdowns 

In late July, CDT Europe joined over 60 civil society partners in an open letter addressed to EU Commissioner for the Internal Market, Thierry Breton, seeking clarification on concerning comments he made suggesting that the EU Digital Services Act (DSA) allows blocking of online platforms that don’t ‘immediately’ remove hateful content. Advocates highlighted the danger of such comments, which could be used to reinforce the weaponisation of internet shutdowns globally, and which fundamentally mischaracterised the rules laid down by the DSA. 

The joint efforts of civil society had an impact: Commissioner Breton issued a detailed and clarifying response after less than 24 hours. In agreement with civil society, Breton clarified that the DSA does not allow arbitrary shutdown of online platforms as a sanction, but does leave open the possibility for proportionate sanctions measures, including temporary restriction of access to an online platform’s services after repeated violations and noncompliance with the regulation. Civil society welcomed this swift response, and will continue to liaise with the Commissioner and his team to ensure that both EU institutions and member states enforce the DSA in the most human rights-respecting manner. 

Civil Society Engages in a Dialogue with the UN High Commissioner and EESC for Human Rights Protection

On 20 July, CDT Europe Director Iverna McGowan joined a civil society dialogue at the European Economic and Social Committee, with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. The discussion provided a platform for civil society organisations to share their concerns and perspectives on specific issues. 

On the subject of online expression and civic space, McGowan highlighted that, whilst the  DSA has the potential to mitigate, prevent, and remedy human rights violations, certain loopholes remain, such as law enforcement acting as trusted flaggers of online content, which can pose risks to freedom of expression and the right to equality before the law. 

McGowan also called upon the High Commissioner to ensure that the framework proposed by UNESCO on platform regulation serves to strengthen, and not undermine, a human rights-based approach. She also referenced CDT’s input to the OHCHR report on human rights and technical standard-setting processes, and called for active engagement with communities of affected people and representation from civil society, both during the standard-setting process and as the standards are being implemented. In this light, she further emphasised the need to support and bolster civil society participation to make technical standard-setting more accessible and inclusive.

CDT Europe Hiring Two Programme Directors to Strengthen Digital Rights Protection Efforts 

We are excited to announce that CDT Europe is expanding and looking for two Programme Directors, who will be tasked with leading advocacy on key policy areas, to join the team. These roles will focus on important areas within the digital aspects of human rights: Security and Surveillance, as well as Equity and Data.

Programme Director, Security and Surveillance: This position focuses on the intersection of human rights, security, and surveillance. The successful candidate will take responsibility for engaging with various stakeholders and developing a strategic advocacy plan on a vision of the EU’s Dual-Use Regulation, including the Child Sexual Abuse Material Regulation. 

More details and application information are available on CDT’s website.

Programme Director, Equity and Data: This position focuses on addressing issues related to data equity and human rights protection in the digital landscape, and through the EU’s Role in global policymaking on artificial intelligence and privacy. It involves taking responsibility for projects about data privacy, digital inclusion, algorithmic bias, and equal access to technology. 

More details and application information are available on CDT’s website.

The post EU Tech Policy Brief: August 2023 appeared first on Center for Democracy and Technology.