Prager University v. Google LLC

951 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 2020)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P is a nonprofit educational and media organization with a mission to 'provide conservative viewpoints and perspective on public issues that it believes are often overlooked.' P creates short videos for high-school, college, and graduate school-age audiences and shares them on the Internet. P has posted hundreds of its videos on a broad range of socio-political issues on YouTube. YouTube (D) hosts user-generated videos and related content on its platform. YouTube is 'the world's largest forum in which the public may post and watch video-based content.' 'More than 500 million hours' of those videos are watched each day. D has reserved the right to remove or restrict content. D may remove content that violates its Terms of Service or restrict otherwise objectionable videos (even if they do not violate the Terms of Service), such as those deemed to be age-inappropriate. At issue here is D's Restricted Mode. When a video is tagged for restriction, D informs the content creator, who may appeal the classification. YouTube's human reviewers then evaluate the decision. D tagged several dozen of P's videos as appropriate for the Restricted Mode. D also 'demonetized' some of P's videos, which means third parties cannot advertise on those videos. P appealed the classifications. At least some of the videos remain restricted or demonetized. P sued D for violation of the First Amendment, and false advertising under the Lanham Act. The court granted D's motion to dismiss. P appealed.