TikTok Seeks Dismissal of New York's Lawsuit
TikTok submitted a motion to dismiss a lawsuit that New York state brought against it in a memorandum on Wednesday in a case alleging violation of consumer protection and product-liability laws. TikTok based its motion to dismiss on the grounds that the plaintiff’s claims are legally defective, and because New York failed “to state a cause of action,” according to the court document.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
The Dec. 27 lawsuit, an amended version of the complaint originally filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) on Oct. 7, alleges TikTok has features that result in younger users spending excessive time on the app. Moreover, it alleged certain content is inappropriate for younger users. James also alleged that TikTok violates the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), since the federal law requires parental consent before collecting personal information of those younger than 13, but TikTok collected such data, including telephone number, IP address and files containing the child's image or voice.
TikTok argued that the plaintiff’s platform-safety claims and child-direction are barred by federal law, including Section 230 of the Federal Communications Decency Act and COPPA. Also, the platform said that the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in Moody v. NetChoice that online publishing activities like those outlined in the complaint are expressive activities entitled to First Amendment protection. TikTok also claimed that the state lacks standing under New York law, as TikTok is not a “product,” and that claims regarding violations of COPPA can only be brought in federal court.
TikTok previously filed a motion to dismiss this case on Dec. 9, which James filed an opposition letter against. There, TikTok similarly argued that the state's claims are barred by Section 230 of the Federal Communications Decency Act, the First Amendment and New York’s Free Speech Clause.
“Contrary to Defendants’ characterization, this matter is not about short-form videos that users create, upload, and share on TikTok, or Defendants’ editorial selection,” James said in the December letter. “Rather, it’s about Defendants’ actions: in particular, their conscious decision to employ addictive features to maximize young user engagement with the TikTok platform to increase profits at the expense of the mental health of young people, and then to enact a deceptive scheme to convince the public that TikTok is safe and appropriate for teenagers and children.”