A reminder that sometimes the law protects what we might wish it wouldn’t. Eric Goldman writes:
Omegle enables real-time video and text chats with users assigned at random. The case involves an 11 year old girl who was a first-time Omegle user. The complaint alleges that a malefactor John Doe manipulated her into disrobing so he could make screengrabs. The plaintiffs brought the following claims against Omegle: (1) possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A; (2) violation of the Federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591 and 1595; (3) violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2710; (4) intrusion upon seclusion; (5) negligence; (6) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (7) ratification/vicarious liability; and (8) public nuisance. Omegle moved to dismiss on Section 230 grounds, which the court grants.
Read more at Technology and Marketing Law Blog.