Ashley Johnson

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has quickly transformed from an obscure law known mostly to tech policy experts to a regular feature in public debates and policy discussions. What is this brief, 25-year-old law making headlines, and how could reforming or repealing it impact our daily lives?

AI promises to help cities save money, address infrastructure needs, and reduce emissions. But to unlock these benefits and help smart cities reach their full potential, the federal government has an important role to play in funding RD&D and facilitating cooperation.

Courts have generally interpreted Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act broadly, but they have identified some limits for when the law does not provide immunity from liability.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has become a key battleground in the larger debate over free speech and content moderation. There are legitimate and illegitimate critiques about it—but they don’t negate the law’s many benefits.

As the United States debates potential reforms to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, it is important to understand and evaluate the alternative approaches that other countries have taken to intermediary liability.

In the wide-ranging debate over Section 230, there have been calls to keep the law as it is, repeal it entirely, or reform it. The best approach would be for Congress to pass targeted reforms that address specific harms without unduly burdening online services.

In the ongoing debate over whether and how to amend Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, it is important to understand the law’s origins, meaning, and impact—because, for better or worse, it has shaped the modern Internet.

Banning targeted advertising, repealing Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and imposing common carriage rules on big tech firms all would do nothing to resolve the tensions over online political speech, but they would be disastrous for consumers and business of all sizes.

Consumers and businesses are both better off with a single federal law than 50 inconsistent state laws, especially given the cross-border nature of the Internet.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the widespread adoption of digital technologies that make

Many countries are waking up to realize localization is bad policy and are taking steps to roll back such measures. But it appears not enough policymakers learned their lesson, as history seems to be repeating itself with another emerging technology: drones.

The National Association of Realtors (NAR) last week agreed to a settlement after the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a civil lawsuit alleging that some of the association’s policies were anticompetitive. This is a major step toward increasing competition in real estate, but the Justice Department should still do more, particularly to increase data sharing that would enable innovative business models to flourish.