Connect with us

Published

on

People wait in line outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on February 21, 2023 to hear oral arguments in two cases that test Section 230, the law that provides tech companies a legal shield over what their users post online.

Jim Watson | AFP | Getty Images

Supreme Court Justices voiced hesitation on Tuesday about upending a key legal shield that protects tech companies from liability for their users’ posts, and for how the companies moderate messages on their sites.

Justices across the ideological spectrum expressed concern with breaking the delicate balance set by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as they rule on the pivotal case, Gonzalez v. Google, even as some suggested a narrower reading of the liability shield could sometimes make sense.

The current case was brought by the family of an American killed in a 2015 terrorist attack in Paris. The petitioners argue that Google, through its subsidiary YouTube, violated the Anti-Terrorism Act by aiding and abetting ISIS, as it promoted the group’s videos through its recommendation algorithm. Lower courts sided with Google, saying Section 230 protects the company from being held liable for third-party content posted on its service.

The petitioners contend that YouTube’s recommendations actually constitute the company’s own speech, which would fall outside the bounds of the liability shield.

But the justices struggled to understand where the petitioner’s counsel, Eric Schnapper, was drawing the line on what counts as content created by YouTube itself.

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito at one point said he was “completely confused” by the distinction Schnapper tried to draw between YouTube’s own speech and that of a third party.

Schnapper repeatedly pointed to the thumbnail image YouTube shows users to display what video is coming up next, or is suggested based on their views. He said that thumbnail was a joint creation between YouTube and the third party that posted the video, in this case ISIS, because YouTube contributes the URL.

But several justices questioned whether that argument would apply to any attempt to organize information from the internet, including a search engine results page. They expressed concern that such a broad interpretation could have far-reaching effects the high court may not be prepared to predict.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted that courts have applied Section 230 consistently since its inception in the 1990s and pointed to the amici briefs that warned overhauling that interpretation would cause massive economic consequences for many businesses, as well as their workers, consumers and investors. Kavanaugh said those are “serious concerns” Congress could consider if it sought to rework the statute. But the Supreme Court, he said, is “not equipped to account for that.”

“You’re asking us right now to make a very precise predictive judgment that ‘Don’t worry, that it’s really not going to be that bad,'” Kavanaugh told U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart, who was arguing the high court should send the case back to the lower court for further consideration. “I don’t know that that’s at all the case. And I don’t know how we can assess that in any meaningful way.”

When Stewart suggested that Congress could amend 230 to account for changes in the reality of the internet today, Chief Justice John Roberts pushed back, noting “the amici suggests that if we wait for Congress to make that choice, the internet will be sunk.”

Even conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, who has openly written that the court should take up a case around Section 230, seemed skeptical of the petitioners’ line in the sand. Thomas noted that YouTube uses the same algorithm to recommend ISIS videos to users interested in that kind of content, as it uses to promote cooking videos to those interested in that subject. Plus, he said, he sees those as suggestions, not affirmative recommendations.

“I don’t understand how a neutral suggestion about something that you’ve expressed an interest in is aiding and abetting,” Thomas said.

The justices had tough questions for Google too, wondering if the liability protections are quite as broad as the tech industry would like to believe. Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, for example, had a long back and forth with Lisa Blatt, counsel arguing on behalf of Google, about whether YouTube would be protected by Section 230 in the hypothetical scenario in which the company promotes an ISIS video on its homepage in a box marked “featured.”

Blatt said publishing a homepage is inherent to operating a website so should be covered by Section 230, and that organization is a core function of platforms, so if topic headings can’t be covered, the statute basically becomes a “dead letter.”

Liberal Justice Elena Kagan suggested it’s not necessary to agree completely with Google’s assessment of the fallout from altering 230 to fear the potential consequences.

“I don’t have to accept all of Ms. Blatt’s ‘the sky is falling’ stuff to accept something about, ‘Boy, there’s a lot of uncertainty about going the way you would have us go,’ in part just because of the difficulty of drawing lines in this area,” Kagan told Schnapper, adding the job may be better suited for Congress.

“We’re a court, we really don’t know about these things,” Kagan said. “These are not like the nine greatest experts on the internet.”

Section 230 proponents are optimistic

Several experts rooting for Google’s success in this case said they were more optimistic after the arguments than before at a press conference convened by Chamber of Progress, a center-left industry group that Google and other major tech platforms support.

Cathy Gellis is an independent attorney in the San Francisco Bay Area who filed an amicus brief on behalf of a person running a Mastodon server, as well as a Google-funded startup advocacy group and a digital think tank. She told CNBC that briefs like hers and others seemed to have a big impact on the court.

“It would appear that if nothing else, amicus counsel, not just myself, but my other colleagues, may have saved the day because it was evident that the justices took a lot of those lessons on board,” Gellis said.

“And it appeared overall that there was not a huge appetite to upend the internet, especially on a case that I believe for them looked rather weak from a plaintiff’s point of view.”

Still, Eric Goldman, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law, said while he felt more optimistic on the outcome of the Gonzalez case, he remains concerned for the future of Section 230.

“I remain petrified that the opinion is going to put all of us in an unexpected circumstance,” Goldman said.

On Wednesday, the justices will hear a similar case with a different legal question.

In Twitter v. Taamneh, the justices will similarly consider whether Twitter can be held liable for aiding and abetting under the Anti-Terrorism Act. But in this case, the focus is on whether Twitter’s decision to regularly remove terrorist posts means it had knowledge of such messages on its platform and should have taken more aggressive action against them.

Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked Schnapper how the decision in that case could impact the one in the Google matter. Schnapper said if the court ruled against Taamneh, the Gonzalez counsel should be given the chance to amend their arguments in a way that fits the standard set in the other case.

WATCH: Should social media companies be held liable for user content? The consequences of changing section 230

Should social media companies be held liable for user content? The consequences of changing section 230

Continue Reading

Technology

Google’s new AI model puts OpenAI, the great conundrum of this market, on shakier ground

Published

on

By

Google's new AI model puts OpenAI, the great conundrum of this market, on shakier ground

Continue Reading

Technology

Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing economy

Published

on

By

Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it's costing economy

If you are holding onto your aging printer or cracked smartphone longer than you had planned, you are not alone.

Heather Mitchell, 69, retired and living in Tucson, Arizona, is content with her phone even though it is old by smartphone standards.

“My Samsung Galaxy A71 is six-years-old. It’s hanging in there surprisingly well for a jalopy. I’ve had issues with it, and still do, but they are minor,” said Mitchell. “I love Samsung phones, but can not afford a new one right now. A new phone would be a luxury.”

The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.

While squeezing as much life out of your device as possible may save money in the short run, especially amid widespread fears about the strength of the consumer and job market, it might cost the economy in the long run, especially when device hoarding occurs at the level of corporations.

Research released by the Federal Reserve last month concludes that each additional year companies delay upgrading equipment results in a productivity decline of about one-third of a percent, with investment patterns accounting for approximately 55% of productivity gaps between advanced economies. The good news: businesses in the U.S. are generally quicker to reinvest in replacing aging equipment. The Federal Reserve report shows that if European productivity had matched U.S. investment patterns starting in 2000, the productivity gap between the U.S and European economic heavyweights would have been reduced by 29 percent for the U.K., 35 percent for France, and 101% for Germany.

Experts agree lost productivity and inefficiency are the unintended consequences of people and businesses clinging to aging technology.

“Think about how much internet speeds have changed in the past decade or more. In the 2010s, 100MB speeds were considered high speed and very good. A short 10 years later and we’re operating at 1GB speeds, which is roughly 10 times faster,” said Cassandra Cummings, CEO of New Jersey-based electronics design company Thomas Instrumentation. Operating at higher GB speeds requires different electronic hardware, and a lot of the older technology can’t handle it.

“Those devices were engineered when no one could fathom speeds that much faster would be mainstream,” Cummings said.

That can be a drain on nationwide networks as well.

“Both the cellular and internet infrastructure has to operate to be backwards compatible in order to support the older, slower devices. Networks often have to throttle back their speeds in order to accommodate the slowest device,” Cummings said. “Often entire sections of networks or company internal networks are running slower than they would if all devices were up to the newer standards,” she added.

Cummings doesn’t deny that staying up to date with new devices and hardware is expensive.

“Many companies, especially small businesses, and individual people can’t afford to constantly upgrade to the latest and greatest devices,” she said.

To ease the transition to new technologies, she says there should be designs that are repairable or modular rather than the constant purge and replace cycles. “So perhaps future devices can have a partial upgrade in say ethernet communications rather than forcing someone to purchase an entirely new computer or device,” Cummings said. “I’m not a fan of the throw-away culture we have these days. It may help the economy to spend more and force upgrades, but does it really help people who are already struggling to pay bills?” she said.

Indeed, entrepreneurs in the device resale market see the longer-lived tech as a success story that can be improved upon. Steven Athwal, CEO of the UK-based The Big Phone Store — which specializes in refurbished phones — says devices longevity is not the problem. “The issue is the lag. Businesses and individuals are trying to squeeze modern workloads out of old hardware, heavy processing, rendering, generation, and admin, and that creates a productivity drag. Things like slow processors, outdated software, and degraded batteries on older tech waste energy and morale,” Athwal said.

He adds that when people hold onto their phones or laptops for five or six years, the repair and refurbishment market becomes an active part of the economy. But right now, in both European, American, and global markets, too much of that happens in the shadows.

“It’s unregulated, underreported, and underutilized. If governments and big tech supported refurbishment properly, aging devices could become part of a sustainable circular economy,” Athwal said, improving the second-hand cycle by extending software support, improving access to parts, and treating repair as infrastructure.

“That’s how you disable constant replacement. No need to constantly push upgrades, which financially strains both small and large businesses alike,” Athwal said.

Still, some device manufacturers have found ways to entice consumers to ditch their older phones for newer ones. For instance, Apple just had one of its most successful new launches with the iPhone 17, and artificial intelligence could be a game-changer.

Najiba Benabess, dean of the business school at Neumann University, says rising prices and sustainability concerns are among reasons “America’s gadgets are aging out,” but the market should be focused on slowing productivity, increasing repair and maintenance expenses, and limited access to software updates and efficiency gains.

“Small businesses, in particular, lose valuable hours each year due to lagging systems, creating what economists call a ‘productivity drag,'” Benabess said. On a national scale, this translates to billions of dollars in lost output and reduced innovation. “While keeping devices longer may seem financially or environmentally responsible, the hidden cost is a quieter erosion of economic dynamism and competitiveness,” she added.

Most people still want the newest and most up-to-date phones and tablets, according to Jason Kornweiss, senior vice president of advisory services at Diversified, a global technology solutions provider, but research does show a widening gap between businesses and individuals when it comes to aging devices.

“Corporations with hundreds or thousands of people are not investing at the same rate,” Kornweiss said, adding that technology is changing so fast IT departments can’t keep up with the pace and that bloated corporations need to vet the newest technology, which takes time, and by the time they do the vetting, something new has arrived anyway. The result: businesses with increasingly long-in-the-tooth technology.

“Businesses establish shelf-life that is multi-year. Employees look at replacing devices within an organization as too tedious and people cringe when the IT department comes with a new device,” Kornweiss said, even when it is a meaningful upgrade, he added.

The price to the organization is then paid in lack of productivity, inability to multitask and innovate, and needless, additional hours of work that stack up. Workplace research conducted by Diversified last year found that 24% of employees work late or overtime due to aging technology issues, while 88% of employees report that inadequate workplace technology stifles innovation. Kornweiss says he doesn’t expect there’s been any improvement in those numbers over the past year.

There’s a disconnect between the numbers and behavior. Many workers report that aging devices stifle productivity, but like a favorite pair of shoes or an old sweater, they don’t want to give them up to learn the intricacies of a new device (which they’ll learn and then have to replace with another). Familiarity can trump productivity for many workers. But the result of that IT clinginess is felt in the bottom line.

“Productivity is hampered and it all has a tangible impact on the economics,” Kornweiss said.

The biggest commodity a worker has is time, he says, and older devices gobble that up. Bring-your-own-device (BYOD) policies can be a savior for businesses slow to upgrade, with individuals using their own more functional devices easily able to integrate into most workplace systems these days, Kornweiss said. Another option for companies that don’t want to buy a bunch of quickly dated devices is to lease.

Kornweiss sees a future where technology continues to advance at warp speed and companies will continue to have trouble keeping up. And individuals like Heather Mitchell will continue to hang on to their devices.

“I tend to hang onto my phone until I have no choice in the matter. In 26 years, this is only my fifth phone,” Mitchell said.

Continue Reading

Technology

More companies are shifting workers to passwordless authentication

Published

on

By

More companies are shifting workers to passwordless authentication

It’s safe to say that no one is crazy about passwords. For chief information security officers, there’s the nightmare of employees leaving lists of passwords on their desks or putting them on Post-it notes on their computers. For workers, there’s the inconvenience of having to enter multiple passwords to gain access to various devices and resources.

Passwordless authentication technology is designed to address these issues, and use of these tools is on the rise. A recent survey of 200 CISOs by Wakefield Research, sponsored by security vendor Portnox, showed that a significant majority (92%) of the security leaders said their organizations had implemented or were planning to implement passwordless authentication. That’s up from 70% in 2024. CISOs cited improved employee productivity and enhanced user experience as the top benefits.

Passwordless authentication verifies user identity without the need for traditional passwords, through alternative methods such as hardware tokens, biometrics, or mobile push notifications. It offers potential benefits such as enhanced security and improved user experience.

Training services provider Universal Technical Institute has begun using a passwordless platform from Microsoft, “and as we expand adoption, the benefits show up quickly, with fewer password resets, fewer service desk tickets, and a faster start to the day,” said Adrienne DeTray, senior vice president and CIO at the company.

“The bigger impact is cultural,” DeTray said. “It shows that we’re serious about making technology feel lighter and more human again. Over the years, we’ve added so many systems and logins that the weight of technology has become part of the work. This is one of those steps that helps remove that administrative drag and makes the ecosystem feel more seamless and connected.”

It’s not just about security, DeTray said, but user experience as well. “Every password reset or lockout slows people down and chips away at their focus,” she said. “Passwordless takes that friction out of the day and gives people time back. It’s part of designing a connected ecosystem where security and usability work hand in hand.”

MFA losing status as ‘gold standard’ cybersecurity

R Systems International, a provider of digital product engineering services, is in the midst of a phased migration to a passwordless environment, said CTO Srikara Rao. “For us, this isn’t about chasing a trend, it’s a direct response to the fact that our previous gold standard, multi-factor authentication, is showing its age,” Rao said. “The threat landscape has evolved past what traditional MFA can handle.”

R Systems’ decision to make the move is driven by both security and business enablement factors. “Credential-based attacks remain the top threat vector, with a significant rise in phishing attempts and several near-miss incidents underscoring the urgency to act,” Rao said. “We want to promote solutions within our organization that are phishing resistant.”

On the operational side, password resets have become quite expensive, Rao said. Resets can be costly due to direct labor expenses and significant indirect costs such as lost employee productivity and IT resource drain. Research firm Forrester estimates that a single password reset can cost $70, and this can add up quickly for large enterprises.

In addition, it’s critical that the company adhere to compliance requirements such as PCI 4.0, which mandates that users reauthenticate everything they restart or access. “Passwordless authentication will make it seamless,” Rao said. “And finally, as we compete for top tech and cybersecurity talent, being a passwordless enterprise signals that we’re a forward-thinking, security-first organization.”

Bring-your-own-device policies are a factor

Health-care services provider Diversus Health is also moving to passwordless authentication, using the technology in the form of certificate-based network access control.

“Due to recently adopting a bring-your-own-device policy, our internal annual HIPAA compliance audit detected lack of network access control as one of our high-risk threats,” said Neil Ford, IT security administrator. “So, we began looking into solutions that could be used to mitigate the threat.”

Diversus Health earlier this year deployed a system from Portnox that uses certificate-based authentication to verify the identity of devices. “We deploy the certificate through a cloud-based endpoint management solution, so verification with Portnox is transparent to staff,” Ford said.

The solution has effectively mitigated the threat of unknown devices connecting to the company’s network and being able to access internal resources, Ford said.

One of the keys to a successful adoption of passwordless authentication is to effectively communicate the security change with staffers. “Employees are overcoming decades of password muscle memory and addressing legitimate user anxiety about ‘what if I lose my device?’ is critical,” Rao said. “We learned quickly that we had to sell the ‘why’ to our employees.”

Enterprises need to frame passwordless authentication not as another security mandate, but as a direct benefit to employees through less frustration, faster logins, and the elimination of password resets, Rao said. Before making the shift, R Systems ran small, interactive training sessions to get people comfortable with access tools such as fingerprint identification on their phones.

“I cannot stress enough the importance of organizations providing user education,” Rao. “It’s a significant difference between a successful deployment and a shelfware investment.”

R Systems passwordless strategy isn’t tied to a single vendor, but built on FIDO2 and WebAuthn open standards, “giving us flexibility to choose the right tool for each risk profile,” Rao said. “Privileged users such as administrators, developers, and executives use FIDO2 hardware security keys, while the broader workforce relies on passkeys integrated with device biometrics like Windows Hello and Face ID.”

The company is still evaluating the results of the transition to passwordless authentication and working to ensure that it works best for everyone.

“We’ve seen our employee experience improve dramatically, with faster logins and a significant reduction in password-related help desk tickets,” Rao said. “Most importantly, passwordless authentication has become a cornerstone of our zero-trust architecture, giving us a stronger, high-assurance identity layer that enables secure access regardless of user or device location.”

Continue Reading

Trending