- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The U.S. Supreme Court has asked Amazon.com Inc. to respond to a petition from Planet Green Cartridges, a move that could signal interest in a case testing the limits of legal protections for online marketplaces under Section 230.
Planet Green is challenging Amazon’s reliance on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields internet platforms from liability for third-party content. The company says it repeatedly notified Amazon—over the course of a year—that certain sellers were falsely advertising new-build printer cartridges as remanufactured and urged Amazon to remove the listings. Amazon has not disputed the existence of the listings but maintains that Section 230 protects it from liability for third-party content.
After prevailing in lower courts, Amazon declined to respond to Planet Green’s petition. The Supreme Court’s request for a reply suggests the justices may see broader legal questions in the case.
At issue is whether a platform can retain Section 230 immunity if it knowingly allows unlawful listings and profits from their sales. Planet Green also contends that Amazon’s algorithms and marketing tools continued to promote the disputed content after the company became aware it could be false or misleading—conduct they argue should fall outside Section 230’s protections.
While Planet Green still faces long odds, a decision by the Court to hear the case could have sweeping implications for truth-in-advertising rules, competition in online marketplaces, and liability for e-commerce platforms that fail to address known illicit content—particularly from overseas sellers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.