NetChoice Criticizes Candidate Biden’s Call to Hold Online Platforms Liable for False Statements by Users

Today, NetChoice criticized the problematic statement made by presidential candidate Joe Biden last night that platforms should be responsible for false posts by their users.

“Candidate Joe Biden suggests we should suppress free speech and make Facebook and Google the arbiters of truth,” said Carl Szabo, Vice President and General Counsel at NetChoice.

“Holding Facebook liable for a user’s false statement is like holding CNN liable if candidate Biden made a false statement on their Town Hall last night.”

“I wonder if Biden thinks TV stations and newspapers should be liable for false claims in political ads they are paid to show, especially since these mediums are the majority of political ad spending.”

NetChoice Raises Concerns with The Filter Bubble Transparency Act

Yesterday, Senators John Thune (R-S.D.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.), unveiled The Filter Bubble Transparency Act. It’s a law that would force large websites to notify users if algorithms determine the order or origin of content the user sees. The bill would also mandate that these online services provide an alternative unsorted version of their news feeds.

“This bill would undermine efforts by platforms to stop the spread of hate speech, misinformation, and other harmful news and views — just as we’re going into an election year,” said Carl Szabo, General Counsel at NetChoice. “This bill could reverse progress made by platforms in response to concerns about online misinformation during our last election.”

“Algorithms are the latest boogey-man for tech critics, but algorithms are how websites determine the origin and order of content shown to users, based on interests shown by that user and others they may friend and follow.”

“Congress should let tech businesses determine how to best serve their users.”

NetChoice Raises Consumer Privacy Concerns about the ACCESS Act

Today, NetChoice raised concerns about the ACCESS Act, introduced today by Sen. Hawley (R-MO), Sen. Warner (D-VA), and Sen. Blumenthal (D-CT) that the bill is more focused on attacking big tech than protecting and empowering consumers.

“As presented in the ACCESS Act, data portability will inevitably endanger data security,” said Carl Szabo, Vice President and General Counsel at NetChoice. “Online hackers and criminals looking to steal consumer data will benefit from the ACCESS Act.” 

“These government imposed data portability requirements would make consumer data more vulnerable to abuse.”

The bill could also undermine efforts by market leaders including Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Twitter, to introduce data portability in a way that empowers consumers without undermining privacy or data security.

The ACCESS Act only aims to regulate large tech businesses with over 100,000,000 active monthly users in the U.S. It also fails to include preemption.

 “By only impacting the largest American businesses, the ACCESS Act is clearly focused more on attacking large tech innovators rather than creating a safe and secure portability system,” continued Szabo.

NetChoice Launches Campaign to Protect Law Enforcement’s Use of Facial Recognition Technology to Promote Public Safety

Petition Urges State Lawmakers to Reject the Proposed Moratorium on Facial Recognition

WASHINGTON – NetChoice, a trade association committed to the use of technology that fosters free enterprise and free expression, today launched a campaign to protect the use of new technologies, such as facial recognition, for law enforcement in Massachusetts.

The campaign is powered by new survey data to educate Massachusetts residents and political stakeholders about these technologies: how they enable law enforcement to maintain public safety, and that most of the public oppose an all-out ban on the use of this technology by law enforcement.

NetChoice is inviting stakeholders, community leaders, and members of the public to sign a petition urging Massachusetts state lawmakers to reject the proposed moratorium on facial recognition use for law enforcement.

“Every day facial recognition technologies help law enforcement to generate leads in cases, such as homicide, rape, armed robbery and other violent crime, as well as for non-enforcement reasons, including identifying elderly persons stricken with dementia, finding lost and missing children, identifying homeless persons with mental illness and identifying deceased persons,” said Carl Szabo, Vice President and General Counsel of NetChoice.

“A moratorium on facial recognition technology not only goes against what Bay Staters want, it denies law enforcement tools needed to help keep our communities safe.”

Survey data from Pew also shows a majority of Americans (56 percent) trust law enforcement to use facial recognition technology responsibly.  

A new poll by Savanta found Massachusetts residents are more supportive of allowing law enforcement to use facial recognition technology responsibly than the general population.

 The Savanta survey of Massachusetts residents shows:

●      66 percent of Bay Staters say we should not deny law enforcement from using new technologies, such as facial recognition, to fight and deter crime.

●      64 percent of Bay Staters agreed facial recognition technology has the potential to make communities safer.

●      46 percent of Bay Staters said government should not strictly limit the use of facial recognition technology if it comes at the expense of the public’s safety.

Szabo added, “The survey results confirm that despite calls by some for a moratorium in Massachusetts, people across the state value this technology to keep their communities safe and help law enforcement do their jobs more effectively.”

Full survey data can be found here. For more information, please email  

About NetChoice

NetChoice is a trade association fighting to protect free speech and free enterprise online. 

NetChoice Criticizes Bill That Would Upend Short-Term Rental Market

Today, NetChoice criticized a new bill introduced by Rep. Case (D-HI) that would upend the American short-term rental market by removing Section 230 protections for platforms where owners list their properties.

“This bill creates a moral hazard by letting big hotel chains harass short term rental competitors, just so the big hotels can further increase their room rates,” said Steve DelBianco, President of NetChoice.  [see direct quotes from hotel chain executives below]

“Weakening Section 230 will damage Americans’ ability to communicate online.  The bill empowers Marriott to stop us from lawfully earning rental income on our own homes.”

“It’s laughable to hold the Washington Post liable for bad acts associated with rentals that appear in classified ads — but that is what this bill does.  This bill is so broad it allows cities to ban home rental ads on craigslist and on any website showing classified ads.”

Hotel chain executives have said on record that laws curtailing STRs would allow them to raise prices:

  • LaSalle Hotel Properties’ CEO Mark Barnello told his investors that a law curtailing short-term rental services would allow hotels to boost their prices by eliminating competition.  Passage of a law liming short-term rental services “should be a big boost in the arm for the business, certainly in terms of the pricing.”
  • On an earnings call last year, Jon Bortz, Chief Executive of Pebblebrook Hotel Trust, which owns Embassy Suites, Doubletree and other hotels, said that Airbnb has put a dent on the company’s “ability to price at what maybe the customer would describe as sort of gouging rates.”

NetChoice Decries Announcement of Antitrust Action Against Facebook and Google by State Attorneys General

Today, NetChoice decried the announcement of antitrust investigations by several state Attorneys General against Facebook and Google.

“Google and Facebook face huge competition from dozens of market players and even each other,” said Carl Szabo, Vice President & General Counsel for NetChoice. “Neither Facebook nor Google use their market position to harm consumers — the standard by which antitrust accusations are judged.”

“State AGs should focus on markets with greater prevalence of consumer harm. 95% of Americans say antitrust enforcement should be most focused on industries other than tech, likely because such evidence of consumer harm is scant.”

“State AGs should chase clear cut cases of consumer harm, not headlines about attacks on popular brands.”

NetChoice Raises Concerns with FTC Decree Against YouTube for Alleged COPPA Violations

Today, NetChoice raised concerns about the FTC’s announcement that they plan to fine YouTube for alleged COPPA violations.

“Congress created COPPA with clear guardrails — today the FTC broke through them,” said Carl Szabo, General Counsel of NetChoice. “This action puts all general audience sites on unsure footing. Is Angry Birds now subject to COPPA? What about CandyCrush or Marvel comics?” 

“The FTC has transformed COPPA from objective principles to subjective punishment for virtually any website – whether child-directed or not.”

In its decision, the FTC greatly expanded the existing subjective COPPA standard to general audience websites even when users sign a contract saying they are over 13.

“This decree will slash the advertising revenue that supports video creators producing high-quality child-friendly content. This means far fewer ad dollars to support videos that my teenager watches to learn about nutrition, sports instruction, and science projects,” said NetChoice President Steve DelBianco.

NetChoice Supports Senators Klobuchar and Blumenthal on Need for Antitrust Investigation of Ticketmaster-Livenation

Today, NetChoice commended U.S. Senators Klobuchar and Blumenthal’s request that the Department of Justice investigate Ticketmaster-Livenation anti-competitive actions, whether it has violated the Sherman Act, and if it should be broken up.

“The Department of Justice and state Attorneys Generals should address real instances of consumer harm from monopolies like Ticketmaster-Livenation instead of wasting resources on tech industry witch-hunts.” said Steve DelBianco, President of NetChoice.

“DoJ should focus on actual instances of consumer harm instead of targeting competitive businesses that a politician doesn’t like. Ticketmaster-Livenation has abused its dominant market position to raise ticket prices and “convenience fees,” and is therefore a far greater threat of consumer harm than competitive markets like social media and online platforms.”

The lack of competition has allowed Ticketmaster to continue increasing its “convenience fees,” even as technology should be driving those costs down.”

NetChoice Challenges State Attorney’s General Antitrust Attack on Tech

As reported by the Wall Street Journal, several state Attorneys General from across the country are launching an antitrust investigation into technology businesses including Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google.

“These cases brought by state AGs are weak as these platforms have neither market dominance nor engage in anti-competitive behavior,” said Carl Szabo, Vice President and General Counsel at NetChoice.

“It’s clear that tech markets are highly competitive. Within 18 months of launching, Tik Tok achieved over a billion global downloads, Snapchat maintains a strong standing, Spotify is double the size of Apple music, and Walmart remains the largest seller in the world.”

“State AGs should focus on industries where consumer harm actually exists. NetChoice polling shows that only 5% of consumers think that antitrust enforcement should be most focused on online platforms.“

“This attack on online platforms by Republican AGs should concern conservatives who expect the GOP to be the party of small government – instead, these AGs are listening to the siren song of populism in their desire to regulate businesses they don’t like.”

NetChoice Criticizes Congressional Efforts to Upend Short-Term Rental Market

Today, NetChoice criticized efforts by Rep. Case (D-HI) to pass legislation that would upend the American short-term rental market by removing Section 230 protections.

“Nobody would say that a newspaper is liable for problems that occur with a rental that appeared in the paper’s classified ads, but that is just what Case’s bill would do to short-term rental platforms. This approach creates a moral hazard by shifting legal responsibility from the homeowner to the platform that lists it for rental.” said Steve DelBianco, President of NetChoice.

“Without Section 230 it will be harder for homeowners to earn extra income through short-term rental of their home, which today is helping them cover expenses and mortgage payments.”

“Weakening Section 230 will damage Americans’ ability to communicate online.  The beneficiaries of this bill are big hotel chains who want to raise room rates without worrying that guests would consider short-term rentals as an alternative.”