Court Rejects Product Liability Claim For Social Media Platforms

With the rise of social media has come concerns that these platforms are endangering the welfare of our children. It has been traditionally quite difficult to file a lawsuit against a platform like Facebook, but personal injury attorneys have tried. They argue that a platform like Facebook is actually a product (a defective product) and that, as the manufacturer of the product, Facebook is liable for the deaths of teens who took their own lives. In the U.K., Facebook was held liable for the suicide of a teen. However, here in the States, plaintiffs have had a much harder time winning cases.

Bogard v. TikTok 

In Bogard v. TikTok, a class of parents sued YouTube, TikTok, and their parent companies, claiming that the platforms’ reporting features were “defectively designed”. This allowed harmful videos to remain visible even after users flagged them.

In this case, the judge dismissed the product liability claims against the social media companies, holding that the plaintiffs failed to identify a “product” with a clear “design defect” under traditional product liability doctrine. In addition, the court observed that content moderation or reporting tools are not products in the same sense as a vehicle or bar of soap. In addition, the plaintiffs failed to properly allege that the algorithms were themselves defective.

Ultimately, the court determined that the plaintiffs’ real problem was with moderation and content decisions. Such decisions are typically insulated from strict product liability.

Why are courts rejecting algorithms as products? 

• A “product” is tangible – Traditionally, products have been tangible. With the rise of the internet, however, there is some confusion. The courts are sorting out this confusion on behalf of social media companies, finding that their algorithms do not constitute products.

• First Amendment issues – There’s a major question as to whether or not curbing algorithms violates the protections of the First Amendment. Courts have rejected imposing liability for expressive content design features.

• Causation, predictability, and complexity – Establishing that an algorithm had a specific defect that caused a specific harm is technically quite difficult. Algorithms are opaque, evolve over time, and interact with countless external variables.

• Post-sale decision versus design decision – Many of the alleged harms relate to how the platform responds to reports after it’s deployed. Courts can distinguish those decisions from fixed, defective design decisions.

• Policy and doctrine – Courts are wary of turning every dissatisfaction with content systems into a product defect case.

Talk to a Florida Product Liability Lawyer Today 

Have you been injured by a dangerous or defective product? If so, the Florida product liability lawyers at Halpern, Santos & Pinkert can help you recover damages for your injuries. Our Florida personal injury lawyers have years of experience trying cases like yours, and can help you recover a substantial settlement for your injuries. Call today to learn more.