Latest / That KEVIN Show / The Landmark Jury Verdict Against Meta and YouTube

Transcript

The Landmark Jury Verdict Against Meta and YouTube · That KEVIN Show

• 0:01
  Speaker 1: From the birthplace of radio's greatest era. Now from New
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: York It's Radio Night Live with Kevin McCullough. Unlike anything
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: else on radio today, it's a front row seat for
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: great information with today's leading experts. Travel with a third
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: generation travel icon Linda Purillo, The Fox News Medical All
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Stars featuring doctor Mark Siegel, Doctor Martin McCarey, doctor Jennet Nischwatt,
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: the Og doctor Nicole Sapphire, Legal analysis from former prosecutor
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: and court journalism superstar Imran I'm Sorry, and Christine Nicholas,
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: the quintessential heartbeat to New York hospitality, all joining a
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: legendary broadcast pro Kevin McCullough on a mission unlike any other,
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: united to bring back New York Now Live from Studio
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: one to eleven. Hears Kevin McCullough.
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: Well, don't look now, it's Radio Night Live and glad
• 0:59
  Speaker 2: to have you with us. Kevin McCollough is my name,
• 1:01
  Speaker 2: And when I say we, I mean that guy right there, Imron,
• 1:04
  Speaker 2: I'm sorry, who's had a combination of factors that has
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: occupied his time, not the least of which is a
• 1:11
  Speaker 2: newborn baby and a lot of stuff at work. But
• 1:14
  Speaker 2: he is back and Imron, it's good to see you.
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: Thank you for being here.
• 1:18
  Speaker 3: Yeah, Kevin, it's good to be back.
• 1:19
  Speaker 4: I'm excited to chat about the law with you. It's
• 1:22
  Speaker 4: been a few weeks now.
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: I feel like I've gone legal stupid since you've been gone.
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: It's like it's like if I have a little bit
• 1:29
  Speaker 2: of like a little Imron hit each week, then I
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: feel like I'm smarter. But anyway, it's good to have
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: you back. So lots of things going on since the
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: last time we spoke that we weren't at war with Iran,
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: and there was questions about you know, War Powers Act
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: and all that kind of stuff that we could have
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: gotten into. But today's let's do the breaking stuff because
• 1:50
  Speaker 2: there is this big jury verdict against Big Tech that
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: the Supreme Court has said is you know they're gonna
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: they're going to decide here on this, and you've been
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: all over media talking about it.
• 2:04
  Speaker 4: Tell us what happened, right, sure, So, so this is
• 2:06
  Speaker 4: actually a trial verdict that's coming out of Los Angeles,
• 2:11
  Speaker 4: and it's a a.
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: Means Supreme Court. I just meant there was a verdict.
• 2:15
  Speaker 4: Guess yeah no, but but you may have some foreshadowing there, Kevin,
• 2:18
  Speaker 4: because you know, who knows if this percolates even out
• 2:20
  Speaker 4: of the state realm and up to the Scotus at
• 2:23
  Speaker 4: the end of the day through the appeal process. But first,
• 2:27
  Speaker 4: on the trial level in state court in LA a
• 2:31
  Speaker 4: jury rendered a verdict for an aggregate of six million
• 2:35
  Speaker 4: dollars for an individual plaintiff. They were calling her Kaylee.
• 2:39
  Speaker 4: She was going by Kailee during the lawsuit. And it
• 2:44
  Speaker 4: was against the big behemoths of social media, Facebook and
• 2:50
  Speaker 4: Instagram under the umbrella of Meta. And you know, Mark
• 2:55
  Speaker 4: Zuckerberg's testified during this trial. So this was a historic
• 3:00
  Speaker 4: trial mainly not only because of the fact that Zuckerberg's
• 3:04
  Speaker 4: in court. They're testifying along with We're.
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: Going to have to think that a lot all the
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: stuff that Meta does, I doubt Zuckerberg, like you know,
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: ninety nine ms out of one hundred even shows up
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: in court. So the fact that he had to testify,
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: that's a big deal.
• 3:18
  Speaker 4: Right right, Yes, And you know this is sort of
• 3:21
  Speaker 4: being called a landmark case, a bell Weather case, perhaps
• 3:26
  Speaker 4: social media's big Tobacco, Big Pharma moment, in terms of
• 3:31
  Speaker 4: being held accountable as to certain practices and business practices
• 3:35
  Speaker 4: and in a nutshell.
• 3:36
  Speaker 3: What it was was that.
• 3:38
  Speaker 4: This plaintiff brought a lawsuit against Meta saying that she,
• 3:43
  Speaker 4: as a youth, was targeted by their algorithms by the
• 3:47
  Speaker 4: way they designed the social media platform, and was sort of.
• 3:52
  Speaker 3: You know, there was a constant stream of.
• 3:53
  Speaker 4: Content for her that she became addicted to social media
• 3:58
  Speaker 4: and that caused her psychological harm and damages.
• 4:02
  Speaker 3: And why this case was unique.
• 4:06
  Speaker 4: Was because it got over the hurdle of US Code
• 4:10
  Speaker 4: Section two thirty, which insulated social media platforms for so
• 4:16
  Speaker 4: many years from liability, saying they can't be held accountable
• 4:21
  Speaker 4: or libel in the court of law for content on
• 4:24
  Speaker 4: their platform, especially that which is posted by third parties
• 4:28
  Speaker 4: and users.
• 4:29
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 4:30
  Speaker 4: But this got over that because it was retooled in
• 4:33
  Speaker 4: essence as a products liability lawsuit saying that there was
• 4:37
  Speaker 4: a defective design here that targeted youth and caused these problems.
• 4:44
  Speaker 4: And it's piggybacking Kevin on another verdict that came out
• 4:48
  Speaker 4: of New Mexico that was brought by the New Mexico
• 4:52
  Speaker 4: State Attorney General against Meta, and in that case, a
• 4:58
  Speaker 4: three hundred and seventy five million dollar verdict was rendered
• 5:02
  Speaker 4: by a jury and that was just on Tuesday of
• 5:04
  Speaker 4: this week also again for similar conducts. You know, it
• 5:09
  Speaker 4: was a consumer safety and rights lawsuit and they got
• 5:14
  Speaker 4: hit with that verdict. Now this is these are you know,
• 5:16
  Speaker 4: they're large numbers, but really in the grand scheme of
• 5:19
  Speaker 4: things there, it's somewhat pennies for.
• 5:22
  Speaker 3: Massive uh, you know, a massive company like Meta, which
• 5:26
  Speaker 3: is you know, in the billions of network.
• 5:29
  Speaker 4: But it's it's it's important from a legal aspect because
• 5:33
  Speaker 4: there has not been any sort of actions or accountability
• 5:37
  Speaker 4: from a legal standpoint for these social media platforms. Uh.
• 5:41
  Speaker 4: And now this is sort of a landmark case and
• 5:44
  Speaker 4: there's other litigation out there in the ether, Kevin, both
• 5:47
  Speaker 4: federal and state across the country where they'll be looking
• 5:51
  Speaker 4: at this case as precedent. And I don't want to
• 5:56
  Speaker 4: get you know, you know, too far ahead, but you
• 5:59
  Speaker 4: can be short. And the attorney through Meta have stated
• 6:03
  Speaker 4: that they intend to appeal.
• 6:04
  Speaker 3: They disagree with the verdict, and.
• 6:06
  Speaker 4: The appellate decision will have ramifications too once those decisions
• 6:12
  Speaker 4: come out.
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: Well, and it's the precedent issue is really big because
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: if that turned into a class action suit of Facebook users,
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: you're looking at billions and billions and settlements eventually, because
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: you've got millions, you have hundreds of millions of users.
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: So I mean it would be one of those things
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: where if pretty much and you know that, there will
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: be a slip and fall firm somewhere out there signing
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: people up saying hey, let us get you a piece
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: of the of the METAPI. Do you think you were?
• 6:44
  Speaker 4: You know?
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: And who knows where all of that would lead. But
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: let me let me go back for some clarifications. Section
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: two thirty is that the debate over whether or not
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: social media is a content provider versus a neutral plantm.
• 7:01
  Speaker 4: Right right in that's this right, that's the and it
• 7:04
  Speaker 4: has shielded these providers because it.
• 7:08
  Speaker 2: Was shielding the providers when we didn't really know much
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: about algorithm and how algorithm interacted with content. See I
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: think I think that changes the equation a little bit
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: because if the algorithm is now selecting for you, feeding
• 7:25
  Speaker 2: you things based on the content itself, they're not just
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: a neutral platform anymore.
• 7:31
  Speaker 4: Absolutely, and right now, Section two thirty has been around
• 7:34
  Speaker 4: for a while, Kevin right, at least in technology years,
• 7:38
  Speaker 4: right where technology evolves so fast. Look what we're dealing
• 7:42
  Speaker 4: with with AI and the way that's rapidly progressing, and
• 7:46
  Speaker 4: the law is not keeping up with the technology. Which
• 7:49
  Speaker 4: is why Section two thirty of the nineteen ninety six
• 7:52
  Speaker 4: Communications Decency Act right where it did shield the providers
• 7:57
  Speaker 4: from third party actions or content that was posted outside
• 8:01
  Speaker 4: of the control of the social media platform or company.
• 8:05
  Speaker 4: H that was at a time when we didn't have
• 8:07
  Speaker 4: all this content being spewed out at you. If you
• 8:09
  Speaker 4: remember social media from an earlier sort of standpoint or phase,
• 8:14
  Speaker 4: we're talking about MySpace, we're talking about friends. Like early
• 8:18
  Speaker 4: era social media, it was it was more so content
• 8:23
  Speaker 4: driven by the user versus now all these targeted ads
• 8:28
  Speaker 4: and algorithms that you deal with and pop ups where
• 8:31
  Speaker 4: you know, you're you're scrolling on Instagram or you're on Facebook,
• 8:35
  Speaker 4: and you are inundated with this content based on whatever information,
• 8:41
  Speaker 4: uh they are extracting as to your search so you know,
• 8:45
  Speaker 4: search terms on Google or you know, there's that sort
• 8:48
  Speaker 4: of theory that oh, you're talking with a friend or
• 8:51
  Speaker 4: a loved one about something and of all of a sudden,
• 8:53
  Speaker 4: you see for it right exactly. So it's a different era,
• 8:57
  Speaker 4: it's a different age. Section two didn't necessarily keep up
• 9:01
  Speaker 4: with that. But that's why you have sort of the
• 9:04
  Speaker 4: laws a living, breathing thing where it's deriving not only
• 9:09
  Speaker 4: from the statute or the written word in our laws,
• 9:11
  Speaker 4: but also the way they are interpreted and handed down
• 9:14
  Speaker 4: by judges and juries.
• 9:16
  Speaker 3: And that's what we see here.
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and applied to very very very real changing events
• 9:22
  Speaker 2: on the ground in real time. Lots more I want
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: to ask you about related to this story. It's fun
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: to have Imron back. It's Legal Night. It's Radio Night Live.
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: Don't go anywhere from New York. It's Radio Night Life
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: with Kevin McCulloch. All right, welcome back. It's Legal Night,
• 9:47
  Speaker 2: and that means Imron, I'm sorry, is in the Chief
• 9:51
  Speaker 2: Prosecution's chair here at Radio Night Live. Kevin mccallough, glad
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: to have you as well. Today a jury verdict being
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: handed down meta and YouTube major rulings over addictive design
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: harming minors. People are going to argue is this a
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: good thing? Is this a bad thing? But this case
• 10:11
  Speaker 2: alone was six million dollars to one user last or
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: this Tuesday, just this week, a New Mexico court finding
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: three hundred and seventy five million dollars in damages against
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: social media on similar grounds, and we were just discussing
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: the importance of this imron when we're talking about content
• 10:33
  Speaker 2: that is algorithmically designed. I have quite a bit more
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: experience with this than I did even three months ago.
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: We have a little music collective that we've started, and
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: none of us are in the same spot. So I'm
• 10:49
  Speaker 2: in New York, our lead vocalist is in Kentucky, are
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: one of our main producers in Nashville. The other one
• 10:55
  Speaker 2: is in la And then we've got a keyboard guy
• 10:57
  Speaker 2: that adds some stuff and he's in Alabama. So we're
• 11:00
  Speaker 2: literally across the country. But as we've put these projects
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: together and we've released them on Spotify, I'm learning a
• 11:06
  Speaker 2: lot about the Spotify algorithms and how they look at
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: the substance of content. They look at the esthetic of content,
• 11:14
  Speaker 2: and in music it's you know, sound, so you're dealing
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: with sound files, you're dealing with those types of things.
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: But the algorithm is constantly and there's so much written
• 11:25
  Speaker 2: about this. The constantly is the algorithm is constantly testing
• 11:31
  Speaker 2: content against content to see what makes a good match.
• 11:34
  Speaker 2: And if they find, you know, a good spot for
• 11:36
  Speaker 2: a song, maybe a song that leans more towards jazz,
• 11:39
  Speaker 2: and so it starts to push it naturally to jazz curators,
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: whereas the pop stuff goes to the pop and the rock.
• 11:44
  Speaker 2: And you see how that works in just the audio
• 11:48
  Speaker 2: version of what is in essence a social media network
• 11:52
  Speaker 2: that being Spotify on Instagram. At the same time, we
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: set up a page for the band or the group,
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: and I've got my hard news page that I try
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: to manage, and then I've got my personal page that
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: I interact with friends and relatives on. And in each
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: one of those, if you go to Instagram and you
• 12:11
  Speaker 2: go to the search page, you put in whatever you
• 12:13
  Speaker 2: see what they're pushing towards you in the in the
• 12:16
  Speaker 2: whole page that's sitting under the search bar, so just
• 12:19
  Speaker 2: when you pull it up for that account. So if
• 12:20
  Speaker 2: you go to the t Collective's search page, you see
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: Charlie Pooth and Taylor Swift and Katy Perry and all
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: these musicians that are there because it's a it's a
• 12:30
  Speaker 2: music group that mostly interacts with music content. And I've
• 12:35
  Speaker 2: never put any of this stuff into the actual system.
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: It's all figured it out on its own and is
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: serving now me those different veins and on my news page.
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: I get every conspiracy theory, every thing that's related to
• 12:50
  Speaker 2: the most controversial, you know, cataclysmic news things going on,
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: and in my personal space, I get a lot less
• 12:58
  Speaker 2: of like that kind of you know, really hardcore, divided,
• 13:03
  Speaker 2: clearly defined algorithmics type stuff. And it's much more related
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: to stuff I've talked with someone about or we've you know,
• 13:11
  Speaker 2: done those other things. So it's you can really see
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: it with just bare eyes that what's happening here is
• 13:18
  Speaker 2: totally conceivable. But in the likelihood of this case, it
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: could be very damaging, depending on you know, what the
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: algorithm is deciding about you and who you are.
• 13:29
  Speaker 4: Right certainly, and also in the particular context of this litigation,
• 13:34
  Speaker 4: when is dealing with minors right where the mind is
• 13:38
  Speaker 4: so malleable, and you know, if a minor somehow finds,
• 13:45
  Speaker 4: you know, in their algorithm or the content something disturbing
• 13:49
  Speaker 4: or or you know, which is inappropriate, but now it
• 13:52
  Speaker 4: starts multiplying itself.
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: Every time you look on it, you get four more
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: things fed.
• 13:57
  Speaker 3: Your way exactly exactly, So that's what you know.
• 14:00
  Speaker 4: The concept in this lawsuit was that the design and
• 14:05
  Speaker 4: the sort of the technology behind the algorithm and the
• 14:10
  Speaker 4: targeted content and also the ability and tendency of you know,
• 14:17
  Speaker 4: placing repetitively certain content right when you're scrolling or whatnot
• 14:23
  Speaker 4: before minors is something that lends itself to harm. And
• 14:26
  Speaker 4: this particular plaintiff was able to convince this jury that
• 14:30
  Speaker 4: she was harmed due to.
• 14:32
  Speaker 3: That the aspect of that content.
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: That was the harms that she claimed in her in
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: eating disorders, per pressure suicide, what was it?
• 14:42
  Speaker 4: So it was a slew of emotional distress damages, right,
• 14:48
  Speaker 4: psychological harm right, And I believe you hit on some
• 14:52
  Speaker 4: of those right now, Kevin.
• 14:53
  Speaker 3: So you know that she was alleging, and that was.
• 14:55
  Speaker 4: Of course put before the jury in the form of
• 14:58
  Speaker 4: medical evidence, but then substantially was the expert testimony about
• 15:03
  Speaker 4: the technology itself. So I expect, as you noted before,
• 15:11
  Speaker 4: that this will now spurn on potentially the floodgates of litigation,
• 15:16
  Speaker 4: with people now seeing that they can make a claim
• 15:20
  Speaker 4: that could be either grasped by the jury and get there,
• 15:24
  Speaker 4: meaning that it survived muster and motions to likely dismiss
• 15:29
  Speaker 4: or summary judgment, and a judge allowed it to go forward,
• 15:33
  Speaker 4: and a jury heard that evidence found it compelling enough
• 15:36
  Speaker 4: to award an individual plaintiff claiming these claims and claiming
• 15:40
  Speaker 4: these damages, you know, six million dollars in damage in
• 15:44
  Speaker 4: an aggregate.
• 15:46
  Speaker 2: So I'm curious about this. How long has this case
• 15:49
  Speaker 2: been alive? When did they first file? And how long
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: did it take to get to the verdict?
• 15:53
  Speaker 3: Kevin, I'm not sure the final date.
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: Would it be unusual for it to take more than
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: a year or two years?
• 15:58
  Speaker 3: Yes, yes, so I was going to tell you base on.
• 16:00
  Speaker 3: Let me just I don't.
• 16:01
  Speaker 4: Practice in LA, but I could tell you that in
• 16:04
  Speaker 4: New York. I would imagine the dockets are you know,
• 16:07
  Speaker 4: have the same sort of hef to them. And when
• 16:09
  Speaker 4: you have a hefty docket, meaning the amount of cases
• 16:13
  Speaker 4: pending in court is going to be backed up. So
• 16:16
  Speaker 4: this could have been and I'll try to find the answer.
• 16:18
  Speaker 4: We could maybe come back in a later segment and
• 16:21
  Speaker 4: just you know, let our listeners know.
• 16:23
  Speaker 3: But I would imagine it's been a few years in
• 16:25
  Speaker 3: the making, Okay.
• 16:26
  Speaker 2: The reason I ask is because if you noticed within
• 16:29
  Speaker 2: the I would guess probably six to nine months. I'm
• 16:32
  Speaker 2: seeing this everywhere now, I'm seeing it on the social media.
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: I'm seeing it on the commercials, like during the Super Bowl.
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: For the social media, I'm seeing it on TV ads,
• 16:41
  Speaker 2: I'm seeing it on streaming ads, on like Hulu and
• 16:43
  Speaker 2: those kinds of places. But it seems like all of
• 16:47
  Speaker 2: them have gone very very hard into now setting up
• 16:52
  Speaker 2: child safe accounts. Yes, as though they kind of anticipated
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: that something like this was going to was going to
• 17:00
  Speaker 2: come their way. Now, right on what level will they
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: have to have because it seems to me like there's
• 17:07
  Speaker 2: also going to be some intellectual property stuff that's going
• 17:10
  Speaker 2: to come into play on this, and they're not going
• 17:12
  Speaker 2: to want to give up their super secret, you know,
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: technology for all of the social media to share. And
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: yet if we're going to make something that's safe for
• 17:20
  Speaker 2: kids everywhere, it's like they're all going to there's going
• 17:22
  Speaker 2: to have to be some sort of uniform to how
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: this works. But what do you do for minor accounts?
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: Do you just like not let the algorithm work on
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: accounts that are under the age of you know, eighteen.
• 17:33
  Speaker 4: I think, and I do have the answer now, well,
• 17:36
  Speaker 4: you know, I looked it up, so it was filed
• 17:37
  Speaker 4: October around October twenty twenty two, so you know, it
• 17:42
  Speaker 4: took that long for it to get to Core and
• 17:44
  Speaker 4: you hit a great point. So first, how how do
• 17:47
  Speaker 4: you answer? You know, I'm not a I'm not a
• 17:50
  Speaker 4: computer programmer, but I would imagine if they have the
• 17:52
  Speaker 4: ability to make so many of these target ads and algorithms,
• 17:55
  Speaker 4: they have.
• 17:55
  Speaker 3: The ability to dial it back, Yeah, turn them off, right.
• 17:59
  Speaker 4: Yeah, turn them off, dial it back or someone you know,
• 18:01
  Speaker 4: when it deals with an account logged in as a minor.
• 18:05
  Speaker 4: And one of the you know, aspects of the defense
• 18:07
  Speaker 4: during this litigation by Meta was just that I think
• 18:11
  Speaker 4: Mark Zuckerberg testified as to some of the child safety
• 18:15
  Speaker 4: controls or parental controls for minor accounts that Meta had implemented,
• 18:24
  Speaker 4: you know, on their platform.
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: And trying to say, we're trying to be good here,
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: We're trying to work.
• 18:29
  Speaker 3: Right right, you know. And I think though, you know,
• 18:32
  Speaker 3: when you had a jewelry listing.
• 18:34
  Speaker 2: Okay, hold this thought, because we got to take our break,
• 18:35
  Speaker 2: and when we come back, we're going to get into this.
• 18:38
  Speaker 2: He's iron I'm Kevin, fascinating discussion state yere.
• 18:47
  Speaker 3: Jeffy Joy.
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: And now I'm back to Radio Night Live Yours a color.
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: Literally one of the fastest hours of radio I do
• 19:04
  Speaker 2: each week because it is just so fascinating when Imron
• 19:07
  Speaker 2: and I are able to be together for legal night. Imron,
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: thank you again for all that you've been doing for
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: the last few months, getting your newborn taken care of
• 19:15
  Speaker 2: and all your important cases, but sparing time for us
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: is very special. So thank you. And on what a
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: momentous day, because this verdict out of LA against big
• 19:24
  Speaker 2: tech could actually be very very historic and crack the shield,
• 19:29
  Speaker 2: if you will. On this thing called section two thirty,
• 19:33
  Speaker 2: we'll get into a little bit more of all that.
• 19:34
  Speaker 2: But before we were going to the break, Imron, you
• 19:36
  Speaker 2: were about to make an additional point.
• 19:39
  Speaker 4: Yeah, so I think you know the jewelry looking at this,
• 19:44
  Speaker 4: you know, I would imagine I don't know the sort
• 19:48
  Speaker 4: of the makeup of that jewelry, but I would imagine
• 19:52
  Speaker 4: there were parents on that jewelry, because I know I
• 19:54
  Speaker 4: would want to be it. As an attorney for the
• 19:56
  Speaker 4: plane tip, I'd be looking for parents, you know, who
• 19:59
  Speaker 4: have children who may be engaging with social media. And
• 20:02
  Speaker 4: I can tell you from I have a ten year old.
• 20:05
  Speaker 4: Aside from the infant the baby, I have a ten
• 20:09
  Speaker 4: year old and a six year old, and I certainly
• 20:11
  Speaker 4: even the six year old, but the ten year old.
• 20:14
  Speaker 4: You know, she's now interested in you know, tablets, even
• 20:17
  Speaker 4: like a child phone, which has access to YouTube and
• 20:21
  Speaker 4: things like that. Certainly she doesn't have a social media
• 20:24
  Speaker 4: account or anything like that, but still, you know, YouTube
• 20:27
  Speaker 4: kids and all this stuff which has all that content
• 20:30
  Speaker 4: is all, you know, is something that kids are watching
• 20:32
  Speaker 4: these days. And I can tell you I'm constantly concerned
• 20:36
  Speaker 4: that the content that either you know, my daughter and
• 20:39
  Speaker 4: my son are watching is not appropriate or you know,
• 20:43
  Speaker 4: just mindless sort of dribble that is being in sort
• 20:47
  Speaker 4: of you know, two minutes or less increments and it
• 20:51
  Speaker 4: just moves on to the next sort of.
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: You're a good dad, that's why you worry about it,
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: because you actually do care about your kids. Sadly, there
• 20:58
  Speaker 2: are a lot of household where parents are not there
• 21:03
  Speaker 2: and so the kids just have access to the stuff.
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: And I don't know what the situation was in this
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: case in LA, but you know, parents, you've got to
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: own some of the responsibility on this. I would say
• 21:14
  Speaker 2: from a moral standpoint. I'm not talking about financial but
• 21:17
  Speaker 2: I'm saying from a moral standpoint, it's way more the parents'
• 21:19
  Speaker 2: responsibility than it is the platforms. To know that your
• 21:23
  Speaker 2: kids are on the platform. But from a standpoint of
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: I also have three kids that are a little bit
• 21:29
  Speaker 2: ahead of yours. There are eleven, thirteen, and fifteen, and they,
• 21:35
  Speaker 2: you know, they all have access to online on some level.
• 21:38
  Speaker 2: None of them have a single social media account, but
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: they are dabbling with YouTube a little bit. On my
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: middle is he's a movie maker. He wants to make movies,
• 21:48
  Speaker 2: so YouTube is how he can show him to his friends.
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: But he's got a kid's account. The other two, my
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: sixteen year old, is not on social media yet. I
• 21:56
  Speaker 2: don't know if he'll ever be. I don't think he
• 21:58
  Speaker 2: wants to be. I'm afraid he's going to become the
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: unibomber or something like. He's so math and science and
• 22:04
  Speaker 2: private and quiet all the time. But I'm glad that
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: he's not, you know, that interested in it. But my daughter,
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: who is the youngest, that's the one I'm concerned that.
• 22:14
  Speaker 2: You know, there's there's going to be dangers out there,
• 22:17
  Speaker 2: and I think that the digital frontier is a more
• 22:19
  Speaker 2: dangerous place in some ways than the physical world that
• 22:23
  Speaker 2: they live in because of the easy access that people
• 22:26
  Speaker 2: have to them.
• 22:27
  Speaker 4: Yeah, no, absolutely, you know, And the comment I'm sure
• 22:31
  Speaker 4: the defense. You know, I don't know every argument that
• 22:34
  Speaker 4: was made in court by meta, but I would have
• 22:36
  Speaker 4: imagined there were to be a defense that there's a
• 22:38
  Speaker 4: certain responsibility of this plaintiffs her parents right to have
• 22:42
  Speaker 4: you know, been a buffer to all that content and
• 22:46
  Speaker 4: being responsible and making sure she wasn't accessing all that content. Right.
• 22:51
  Speaker 4: But the jury in that case, I am sure you know,
• 22:54
  Speaker 4: came to this conclusion sort of in the similarity with
• 22:57
  Speaker 4: big tobacco, you know, the opioid crisis, with big pharma
• 23:02
  Speaker 4: that you know, these big corporations may have not been
• 23:05
  Speaker 4: looking out for the common good of their consumer or
• 23:09
  Speaker 4: you know, people out there are weighing the risks and
• 23:12
  Speaker 4: benefits to their actions or their product versus the potential
• 23:16
  Speaker 4: harm all in, you know, in.
• 23:18
  Speaker 3: Order to make a profit.
• 23:19
  Speaker 4: And I bet you that resonated with that jewelry because
• 23:23
  Speaker 4: we've seen that in the other corporations or industries.
• 23:27
  Speaker 3: I should say that were held accountable.
• 23:30
  Speaker 4: But you know, the victory could be kevin short lived
• 23:34
  Speaker 4: because if it's taken up on appeal and it's reversed,
• 23:38
  Speaker 4: then that's setting precedent on the contrary.
• 23:42
  Speaker 2: Right, then you have a target for the supremes to
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: weigh in eventually because you have a divided set of rulings.
• 23:50
  Speaker 2: You know, it's interesting about the section two thirty thing,
• 23:52
  Speaker 2: and we at Salem have discussed this because this thing
• 23:57
  Speaker 2: keeps rearing its head like every four years. And I
• 24:00
  Speaker 2: want to go back to Facebook and the Obama campaigns
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: of his two presidential runs. They kind of figured out
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: the algorithm and they did a huge voter outreach via Facebook.
• 24:14
  Speaker 2: And when Zuckerberg was asked about an unfairness aspect of whatever,
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: he said section two thirty, Section two thirty, I'm just
• 24:22
  Speaker 2: I'm just a platform. You know this is we're We're
• 24:25
  Speaker 2: not a content provider. Trump turns around does the exact
• 24:28
  Speaker 2: same to the opposite benefit in twenty sixteen, and the
• 24:31
  Speaker 2: whole other side of the political landscape is starts screaming
• 24:34
  Speaker 2: about you know, how come he's allowed to do this
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: blah blah blah blah blah. Same thing. We're we're just
• 24:40
  Speaker 2: a platform. We don't have any control over it. Even
• 24:42
  Speaker 2: though there was they were starting to implement an algorithm
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: in which certain ads could be targeted to certain places
• 24:49
  Speaker 2: easier than they had been in the past. So fast forward,
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: there four more years, and you've got every social media
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: platform on the planet d platform Trump because they're saying,
• 25:02
  Speaker 2: we're content providers, we have a responsibility to only provide
• 25:06
  Speaker 2: responsible journalism and responsible stories, and he's irresponsible and he's
• 25:11
  Speaker 2: a danger and threat to society, and so we have
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: to take him off, which I think they all lost
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: both pr and legal credibility and making that argument because
• 25:21
  Speaker 2: for the last fifteen years they had just been screaming
• 25:23
  Speaker 2: Section two thirty the whole time, and that brings us
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: to he gets re elected, and they're all kissy, kissy,
• 25:30
  Speaker 2: you know, make nice. We don't want to make the
• 25:33
  Speaker 2: president mad. And it's this two thirty thing has really
• 25:36
  Speaker 2: gone back and forth in some pretty dynamic pendulum swings.
• 25:39
  Speaker 2: And we'll come back. I get your thoughts on that.
• 25:41
  Speaker 2: It's Legal Knight not going anymore.
• 25:51
  Speaker 3: What a little MOONLIGHTE can do.
• 25:53
  Speaker 1: It's radio night Life, yours Kevin mccullor, what a little moment.
• 25:59
  Speaker 2: Welcome back, It's Legal Night. He's Imron, I'm Kevin, and
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: what a fascinating conversation. But Imran I just recounted the
• 26:06
  Speaker 2: two thirty debate, if you will, which has reared its
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: head nearly every four years in an election cycle based
• 26:13
  Speaker 2: on who wins the White House and what the other
• 26:15
  Speaker 2: side has to say about it. In Zuckerberg spent he's
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: had to spend a lot of time talking about things
• 26:21
  Speaker 2: that he was doing or wasn't doing to make sure
• 26:24
  Speaker 2: that his platform was okay. But does this section two
• 26:27
  Speaker 2: thirty things survive any further because it seems like if
• 26:30
  Speaker 2: you can manipulate the algorithm, you're losing the argument that
• 26:34
  Speaker 2: you're not a content at least manipulator. And so maybe
• 26:37
  Speaker 2: you're not an originator of content, but you're manipulating who
• 26:41
  Speaker 2: sees it and how.
• 26:43
  Speaker 4: Yeah, so I was I think section two thirty it's
• 26:47
  Speaker 4: ripe for either revision and you know, certain stats tell.
• 26:53
  Speaker 2: Us what it actually says so that we are or
• 26:55
  Speaker 2: tell us what it actually means.
• 26:57
  Speaker 4: Right, So in a nutshell, you know, let's just meta
• 27:02
  Speaker 4: or any social media provider Twitter not the same thing. Yes,
• 27:06
  Speaker 4: cannot be found libel for the content that is posted
• 27:11
  Speaker 4: by users, right.
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: So party users originating content in their own accounts is
• 27:18
  Speaker 2: not the responsibility of the corporation is basically what they're saying.
• 27:22
  Speaker 4: In a nutshell, that's what it stands for, right, And
• 27:25
  Speaker 4: it makes sense in many ways because typically under the law,
• 27:30
  Speaker 4: you can't be you aren't necessarily libel for the independent,
• 27:35
  Speaker 4: intentional acts or words of another right. Right, And that's
• 27:39
  Speaker 4: always been a way a corporation, even an employer, or.
• 27:44
  Speaker 2: Well, if you think about it in the like the
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: real world, like you have all these businesses on a block,
• 27:49
  Speaker 2: and a satan worshiper wants to buy the middle shop
• 27:52
  Speaker 2: of the shopping strip, you know, the I guess the
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: landlord could have some say over what it is or
• 28:01
  Speaker 2: what it isn't, but he's not really. I don't care
• 28:04
  Speaker 2: if your shoe salesman or a deli owner or whatever. Like,
• 28:07
  Speaker 2: you just want my property and I don't have. I'm
• 28:09
  Speaker 2: not responsible for you know, your what you sell or
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: how you go about it in that sense, and this
• 28:15
  Speaker 2: is that sense in like the digital space, every user
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: is kind of like its own little shop.
• 28:20
  Speaker 4: Yeah yeah, in many ways, but right, And that's where
• 28:25
  Speaker 4: there's a there's a struggle from a legal standpoint of
• 28:29
  Speaker 4: how to handle this because you're weighing so many different factors, right,
• 28:33
  Speaker 4: just traditional theories of liability for acts of another right.
• 28:37
  Speaker 4: Then also First Amendment considerations are largely at play here
• 28:42
  Speaker 4: and going forward now because it's an evolving technology in
• 28:47
  Speaker 4: so many ways.
• 28:48
  Speaker 3: Right even with AI, right now, AI.
• 28:51
  Speaker 4: The fact that you can manipulate one's image or likeness
• 28:56
  Speaker 4: or words to create content what seemingly could be a
• 28:59
  Speaker 4: tribute it to someone when it's completely false, or the
• 29:03
  Speaker 4: likeness of another that is also expanding this sort of
• 29:06
  Speaker 4: great area of how the law treats.
• 29:08
  Speaker 3: Technology and evolving technology. So who knows.
• 29:11
  Speaker 4: Section two thirty may be repealed, it may be amended
• 29:17
  Speaker 4: or supplemented in a manner to sort of address these issues,
• 29:23
  Speaker 4: but they're also you know, maybe increased accountability for the
• 29:30
  Speaker 4: social media platforms as to the harm that can be recognized.
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: It's obviously starting to come to fruition with these two
• 29:38
  Speaker 2: rulings this week. Right here's the thing that I here's
• 29:41
  Speaker 2: the thing that I struggle with because I don't know
• 29:43
  Speaker 2: how I feel about this issue, Like I really I'm
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: torn about it, don't There's not a clear benefit or
• 29:49
  Speaker 2: winner one way or the other. Because I do think
• 29:51
  Speaker 2: that it is unfair to hold someone else for a
• 29:54
  Speaker 2: third party's actions. But in the pursuit of making money,
• 29:58
  Speaker 2: if you choose to start uffling the deck, so to speak,
• 30:01
  Speaker 2: which is what an algorithm basically is it's like it's
• 30:03
  Speaker 2: like a card shuffler. You've got all these different things
• 30:05
  Speaker 2: and it's like we're putting it through and then we're
• 30:08
  Speaker 2: dealing out to you know, whoever's there. It's you start
• 30:13
  Speaker 2: to even if it's just technological and you're not even
• 30:17
  Speaker 2: you're not even overseeing. I think a lot of algorithm
• 30:22
  Speaker 2: just takes place because the system is fed with the
• 30:26
  Speaker 2: search terms and then it delivers to where those search
• 30:29
  Speaker 2: terms are tied into, so you don't you may not
• 30:32
  Speaker 2: even have human oversight of what the algorithm's actually doing,
• 30:36
  Speaker 2: which is a could be a problem, But I still
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: don't think that necessarily Mark Zuckerberg is responsible for a
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: certain outcome if he if he did not have you know,
• 30:49
  Speaker 2: anything directly involved in making the decision for it. The
• 30:52
  Speaker 2: decision seems to me to be the the kind of
• 30:56
  Speaker 2: moral quantifier. And if you if you have an auto
• 31:00
  Speaker 2: made its system making all of the decisions, man, you
• 31:02
  Speaker 2: could be really up a bad place, really easily, because
• 31:07
  Speaker 2: you know that that automated system may not have a
• 31:09
  Speaker 2: moral code, may not have the ability to have a
• 31:11
  Speaker 2: moral code.
• 31:13
  Speaker 4: No, absolutely, And I think that's where subscrutiny into the
• 31:20
  Speaker 4: technology itself may be necessary and the you know, social
• 31:25
  Speaker 4: media platforms. They want to do that now independently because
• 31:30
  Speaker 4: let's just say, with this case, it may you know,
• 31:33
  Speaker 4: signal that there could be liability there and then you
• 31:38
  Speaker 4: know they're not going to want to be constantly facing litigation,
• 31:43
  Speaker 4: you know, down the road.
• 31:44
  Speaker 2: What does your gut tell you? Does this go anywhere
• 31:47
  Speaker 2: on appeal or well, do you think it'll be? First
• 31:51
  Speaker 2: of all, do we know what circuit it would be
• 31:52
  Speaker 2: appealed to? Do we know anything about the makeup of
• 31:55
  Speaker 2: that court? And would that have do you think any
• 31:57
  Speaker 2: kind of impact on how they would look at this?
• 32:00
  Speaker 4: Yeah, well, so it's a staatecase, right, so it would
• 32:02
  Speaker 4: actually be appealed up to the highest appella court of California.
• 32:06
  Speaker 4: But that would you know, on a federal equivalent, that
• 32:08
  Speaker 4: would be with the Ninth Circuit.
• 32:10
  Speaker 3: Uh, you know, and which you know, But.
• 32:17
  Speaker 4: How would it be handled on appeal? It's it's it's
• 32:20
  Speaker 4: hard to say. It's really the strength of the arguments
• 32:22
  Speaker 4: to get over the Uh, what was a prevailing and
• 32:25
  Speaker 4: winning argument here that the design of these platforms were
• 32:32
  Speaker 4: is sort of designed in a way to target miners
• 32:36
  Speaker 4: and then just you know, shoveth of.
• 32:38
  Speaker 2: This case is the fact that it that it cracked
• 32:41
  Speaker 2: through that barrier.
• 32:44
  Speaker 4: Yeah, well, the reason why I cracked through that barrier
• 32:46
  Speaker 4: because it was a it was a different sort of
• 32:48
  Speaker 4: theory of liability, right, which is the way they design, uh,
• 32:52
  Speaker 4: and that like really the algorithm. So it's it put
• 32:54
  Speaker 4: a spotlight on that and how it can affect.
• 32:57
  Speaker 3: Miners and children and and also adults.
• 33:00
  Speaker 2: Also.
• 33:00
  Speaker 4: I'm sure there'll be cases, you know, and there may
• 33:03
  Speaker 4: be cases already out there that doesn't even don't even
• 33:06
  Speaker 4: necessarily deal with mine.
• 33:08
  Speaker 2: Is she gone into technology law at this point? Because
• 33:10
  Speaker 2: this is going to be this is going to be
• 33:13
  Speaker 2: such a fruitful practice, I think for.
• 33:16
  Speaker 3: People, I'll just say, I'll just say.
• 33:18
  Speaker 2: This, brush it up on your tech terms.
• 33:20
  Speaker 4: I have a colleague who is in this realm, and
• 33:24
  Speaker 4: let's just say we're talking.
• 33:26
  Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, there you go. When we come back, it's
• 33:29
  Speaker 2: Esquire etiquette. Yeah, we've got some of that. IM runs
• 33:32
  Speaker 2: back with us.
• 33:32
  Speaker 5: Don't go on once again from New York Here's Radio
• 33:43
  Speaker 5: night Life and Kevin McCulla.
• 33:47
  Speaker 2: Well, welcome back, glad you're with us. Hey, by the way,
• 33:50
  Speaker 2: programming note for AM nine seventy the answer tomorrow night,
• 33:54
  Speaker 2: You're not Arthur Idolla is out gallivanting doing things that
• 33:58
  Speaker 2: you know, very smart rich lawyers do. I don't know
• 34:01
  Speaker 2: what he's doing, to be honest, I think he's I
• 34:03
  Speaker 2: think he's in the country, but I think he's going somewhere.
• 34:05
  Speaker 2: So it's gonna be he's off, and he's so graciously
• 34:10
  Speaker 2: invited Christina and I to take over his hour tomorrow
• 34:13
  Speaker 2: and that just happens to coincide with the fifth anniversary
• 34:17
  Speaker 2: of the launch of Radio Night Live. So we're going
• 34:20
  Speaker 2: to have a party on the air. You're invited join
• 34:23
  Speaker 2: us from six to eight tomorrow night. And I think
• 34:27
  Speaker 2: every guest that we've ever had on the Fun Friday
• 34:29
  Speaker 2: Show has been invited to return. Many many of them can't,
• 34:34
  Speaker 2: but many of them will be listening or joining us
• 34:36
  Speaker 2: via zoom or whatever, and we're gonna be We're going
• 34:39
  Speaker 2: to be having a great time. I hope you'll check
• 34:41
  Speaker 2: it out tomorrow night at six to eight. All right,
• 34:42
  Speaker 2: Imron Esquire Etiquette, what do we take away from this case?
• 34:46
  Speaker 3: Sure?
• 34:47
  Speaker 4: So, you know, relating our Esquire Etiquette of the week
• 34:51
  Speaker 4: to the topic.
• 34:52
  Speaker 3: You know, I'm gonna I'm going to talk about a
• 34:53
  Speaker 3: case that I had.
• 34:54
  Speaker 4: Which dealt with a social media platform and a client
• 34:57
  Speaker 4: who was being consistently harasz asked by a user with
• 35:02
  Speaker 4: you know, images of her being posted, you know, which
• 35:07
  Speaker 4: were not appropriate for the public, and that she never
• 35:10
  Speaker 4: intended because this.
• 35:12
  Speaker 3: Was an ex boyfriend.
• 35:15
  Speaker 4: Yes, so you know, when you find yourself in that situation,
• 35:19
  Speaker 4: god forbid, there's legal remedies for you, right, you, You
• 35:23
  Speaker 4: certainly should contact a social media provider to alert them
• 35:28
  Speaker 4: of the content and flag it for them. Sometimes that's
• 35:31
  Speaker 4: a long process, right, And that's it takes longer than
• 35:34
  Speaker 4: you would you would hope and you may not get
• 35:37
  Speaker 4: the results or response that you would hope for from
• 35:40
  Speaker 4: a social.
• 35:41
  Speaker 3: Media content provider.
• 35:43
  Speaker 4: However, you can consult with an attorney, and an attorney
• 35:48
  Speaker 4: corresponding with their legal department would get you results a
• 35:52
  Speaker 4: hell of a lot faster than you going it alone.
• 35:56
  Speaker 3: Yes, And there's also another aspect to that.
• 36:00
  Speaker 4: It's also alerting authorities and law enforcement that this is
• 36:04
  Speaker 4: going on. That implicates sometimes questions about jurisdiction and if
• 36:11
  Speaker 4: the individual is in a different state or you know,
• 36:13
  Speaker 4: is this a federal question, and things like that and
• 36:17
  Speaker 4: those sort of issues that may percolate up are best
• 36:21
  Speaker 4: navigated with the assistance of an attorney. But you don't
• 36:25
  Speaker 4: need to feel helpless, right if you have someone advocating
• 36:28
  Speaker 4: for you. If you are not, you know, if you
• 36:31
  Speaker 4: feel like you're not getting the response from the social
• 36:34
  Speaker 4: media platforms that you want, you really should consult with
• 36:37
  Speaker 4: an attorney about this quote unquote revenge porn aspect of
• 36:40
  Speaker 4: the law. And there's legal protections for you out there
• 36:44
  Speaker 4: because this could be traumatic, it could be sort of
• 36:47
  Speaker 4: life altering, it could shatter careers or personal relationships. But
• 36:51
  Speaker 4: there's real legal consequences for the individual who's putting that
• 36:55
  Speaker 4: out there, and you should certainly consult with an attorney
• 36:58
  Speaker 4: to help guide you through the process.
• 37:00
  Speaker 2: Well, I think that's a good word and friend, I
• 37:02
  Speaker 2: hope that you will take it to heart. And of course,
• 37:04
  Speaker 2: if you'd ever like to have who I think is
• 37:07
  Speaker 2: the best civil litigator in the country, take a look
• 37:10
  Speaker 2: at your case, call im Ron's firm. In fact, I
• 37:12
  Speaker 2: am Ron give out the phone number for Idala, Bertuna
• 37:15
  Speaker 2: and Camons so people can reach you if they have
• 37:17
  Speaker 2: a case.
• 37:18
  Speaker 4: Sure, so it's two one, two four eight six zero
• 37:22
  Speaker 4: zero one one two one two four eighty six zero
• 37:26
  Speaker 4: zero one one.
• 37:27
  Speaker 2: All right, that's all we have until tomorrow night's big
• 37:30
  Speaker 2: fifth anniversary party. We'll see you at six pm tomorrow
• 37:33
  Speaker 2: night on AM ninety seventy. The Answer