Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 38 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Fair Housing Coun., San Fernando v. Roommates. Com.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fair Housing Coun., San Fernando v. Roommates. Com Anchor | green | “any activity that can be boiled down to deciding whether to exclude material that third parties seek to post online is perforce immune under section 230.” | 18 |
| 2 | Fair Housing Coun., San Fernando v. Roommates. Com | green | “a website helps to develop unlawful content, and thus falls within the exception to section 230, if it contributes materially to the alleged illegality of the conduct.” | 7 |
| 3 | Barnes v. Yahoo!, Inc. | green | “removing content is something publishers do, and to impose liability on the basis of such conduct necessarily involves treating the liable party as a publisher of the content it failed to remove.” | 6 |
| 4 | Force v. Facebook, Inc. | green | “in light of congress's objectives, the circuits are in general agreement that the text of section 230(c)(1) should be construed broadly in favor of immunity.” | 4 |
| 5 | John Green v. America Online (Aol) John Does 1 & 2 | green | “decisions relating to the monitoring, screening, and deletion of content” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.