Photo of Ryan Mrazik

Ryan Mrazik

Subscribe to Ryan Mrazik's Posts

Ryan represents online communications and storage providers on their core legal issues: user data privacy, content moderation, platform integrity, and privacy litigation. He works with the largest online technology companies as well as startups to help them protect themselves, their users, and their data; promote free speech and expression; and stop child and victim exploitation.

Contact:Read more about Ryan Mrazik

Overview

California Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed AB 1394, a law that imposes new obligations on social media platforms to prevent and combat child sexual abuse and exploitation. The law is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2025, and has two primary requirements for social media platforms (SMP): (1) implement a notice-and-staydown requirement for child sexual abuse material (CSAM); and (2) a prohibition against “knowingly facilitat[ing], aid[ing], or abet[ing] commercial sexual exploitation,” as defined by the statute. If a social media company violates the law, it may be liable to the reporting user for actual damages sustained and statutory damages of up to $250,000 per violation.

The law allows for a civil action to be brought by, or on behalf of, a person who is a minor and a victim of commercial sexual exploitation. The law includes a safe harbor provision for platforms that conduct safety audits. Social media platforms may face damages of up to $4 million per violation.Continue Reading California Law Requires Platforms To Take More Action Against Child Sexual Exploitation

The Supreme Court of New Jersey unanimously held that a wiretap order, rather than a search warrant, is required to seek “prospective electronically stored information” from Meta Platforms, Inc., the provider of the Facebook and Instagram services. Facebook, Inc. v. State, 254 N.J. 329, 341 (2023). The court reasoned that “the nearly contemporaneous acquisition of electronic communications … is the functional equivalent of wiretap surveillance and is therefore entitled to greater constitutional protection.” Wiretap orders are subject to heightened privacy protections, providing greater protections for users.Continue Reading NJ Supreme Court: Wiretap Order Required for Prospective Online Communications