It's Not a Subsidy to Big Tech

Armijo, Enrique

Journal: Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

Volume: 40

First Page: 441

Year: 2022

Bluebook Citation: 40 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT. L.J. 441 (2022)

Author: Enrique Armijo: all 14 publications


Abstract

Most Section 230 reform efforts are based on the predicate claim that the immunity the statute provides is a "subsidy to Big Tech." The argument then follows that if government grants a subsidy to an industry, particularly a large one, there are no legal or constitutional problems with either conditioning that subsidy on certain conduct or revoking it altogether. This premise is wrong. It conflates a subsidy with an immunity, which is conceptually distinct. It misstates both the intended and actual primary beneficiaries of Section 230's immunity, who are not large social media platforms or search engines, but Internet users.

In so doing, the subsidy-to-Big-Tech myth intentionally mischaracterizes both what Section 230 actually does and who benefits from it.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.