{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/60518a52f69aa815d2dba41c/63eee0712572d700111e8041?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"Gonzalez v. Google and the Fate of Section 230","thumbnail_width":200,"thumbnail_height":200,"thumbnail_url":"https://open-images.acast.com/shows/60518a52f69aa815d2dba41c/show-cover.png?height=200","description":"<p>On February 14, the <a href=\"https://www.brookings.edu/events/gonzalez-v-google-and-the-fate-of-section-230/\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">Brookings Institution hosted an event</a> on the upcoming Supreme Court oral arguments in <em>Gonzalez v. Google </em>and <em>Twitter v. Taamneh</em>—two cases that could potentially reshape the internet. The Court is set to hear arguments in both cases next week, on February 21 and 22. Depending on how the justices rule, <em>Gonzalez </em>could result in substantial changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the bedrock legal protection on which the internet is built.&nbsp;</p><p>For today’s podcast, we’re bringing you audio of that discussion. <em>Lawfare</em> senior editor Quinta Jurecic moderated a panel that included Hany Farid, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, with a joint appointment in electrical engineering &amp; computer sciences and the School of Information; Daphne Keller, the director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center; <em>Lawfare</em> senior editor Alan Rozenshtein; and <em>Lawfare</em> editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes.</p>","author_name":"The Lawfare Institute"}