TikTok Must Face Lawsuit over 10-year-old Girl's Death, US Court Rules

A view shows the office of TikTok after the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the US assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. REUTERS/Mike Blake
A view shows the office of TikTok after the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the US assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. REUTERS/Mike Blake
TT

TikTok Must Face Lawsuit over 10-year-old Girl's Death, US Court Rules

A view shows the office of TikTok after the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the US assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. REUTERS/Mike Blake
A view shows the office of TikTok after the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the US assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. REUTERS/Mike Blake

A US appeals court has revived a lawsuit against TikTok by the mother of a 10-year-old girl who died after taking part in a viral "blackout challenge" in which users of the social media platform were dared to choke themselves until they passed out, Reuters reported.

While a federal law typically shields internet companies from lawsuits over content posted by users, the Philadelphia-based 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled the law does not bar Nylah Anderson's mother from pursuing claims that TikTok's algorithm recommended the challenge to her daughter.

US Circuit Judge Patty Shwartz, writing for the three-judge panel, said that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 only immunizes information provided by third parties and not recommendations TikTok itself made via an algorithm underlying its platform.

She acknowledged the holding was a departure from past court rulings by her court and others holding that Section 230 immunizes an online platform from liability for failing to prevent users from transmitting harmful messages to others.

But she said that reasoning no longer held after a US Supreme Court ruling in July on whether state laws designed to restrict the power of social media platforms to curb content they deem objectionable violate their free speech rights.

In those cases, the Supreme Court held a platform's algorithm reflects "editorial judgments" about "compiling the third-party speech it wants in the way it wants." Shwartz said under that logic, content curation using algorithms is speech by the company itself, which is not protected by Section 230.

"TikTok makes choices about the content recommended and promoted to specific users, and by doing so, is engaged in its own first-party speech," she wrote.

TikTok did not respond to requests for comment.

Tuesday's ruling reversed a lower-court judge's decision dismissing on Section 230 grounds the case filed by Tawainna Anderson against TikTok and its Chinese parent company ByteDance.

She sued after her daughter Nylah died in 2021 after attempting the blackout challenge using a purse strap hung in her mother's closet.

"Big Tech just lost its 'get-out-of-jail-free card,'" Jeffrey Goodman, the mother's lawyer, said in a statement.

U.S. Circuit Judge Paul Matey, in a opinion partially concurring with Tuesday's ruling, said TikTok in its "pursuit of profits above all other values" may choose to serve children content emphasizing "the basest tastes" and "lowest virtues."

"But it cannot claim immunity that Congress did not provide," he wrote.



Dutch Watchdog Fines Uber $324 Million for Alleged Inadequate Protection of Drivers’ Data 

An Uber sign is displayed at the company's headquarters in San Francisco, Sept. 12, 2022. (AP)
An Uber sign is displayed at the company's headquarters in San Francisco, Sept. 12, 2022. (AP)
TT

Dutch Watchdog Fines Uber $324 Million for Alleged Inadequate Protection of Drivers’ Data 

An Uber sign is displayed at the company's headquarters in San Francisco, Sept. 12, 2022. (AP)
An Uber sign is displayed at the company's headquarters in San Francisco, Sept. 12, 2022. (AP)

The Dutch data protection watchdog slapped a 290 million euro ($324 million) fine Monday on ride-hailing service Uber for allegedly transferring personal details of European drivers to the United States without adequate protection. Uber called the decision flawed and unjustified and said it would appeal.

The Dutch Data Protection Authority said the data transfers spanning more than two years amounted to a serious breach of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, which requires technical and organizational measures aimed at protecting user data.

“In Europe, the GDPR protects the fundamental rights of people, by requiring businesses and governments to handle personal data with due care,” Dutch DPA chairman Aleid Wolfsen said in a statement.

“But sadly, this is not self-evident outside Europe. Think of governments that can tap data on a large scale. That is why businesses are usually obliged to take additional measures if they store personal data of Europeans outside the European Union. Uber did not meet the requirements of the GDPR to ensure the level of protection to the data with regard to transfers to the US. That is very serious.”

The case was initiated by complaints from 170 French Uber drivers, but the Dutch authority issued the fine because Uber’s European headquarters is in the Netherlands.

Uber insisted it did nothing wrong.

“This flawed decision and extraordinary fine are completely unjustified. Uber’s cross-border data transfer process was compliant with GDPR during a 3-year period of immense uncertainty between the EU and US. We will appeal and remain confident that common sense will prevail,” the company said in a statement.

The alleged breach came after the EU’s top court ruled in 2020 that an agreement known as Privacy Shield that allowed thousands of companies — from tech giants to small financial firms — to transfer data to the United States was invalid because the American government could snoop on people’s data.

The Dutch data protection agency said that following the EU court ruling, standard clauses in contracts could provide a basis for transferring data outside the EU, “but only if an equivalent level of protection can be guaranteed in practice.”

“Because Uber no longer used Standard Contractual Clauses from August 2021, the data of drivers from the EU were insufficiently protected,” the watchdog said. It added that Uber has been using the successor to Privacy Shield since the end of last year, ending the alleged breach.