Roomster Stands By Section 230 Defense in Answer to FTC Complaint
Roomster denies culpability for the fraud allegations brought by the FTC and five states to thwart the company's alleged proliferation of fake positive online reviews, said its answer to the complaint Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-07389) in U.S. District Court for Southern…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
New York. The plaintiffs’ claims are barred because Roomster is “immune from liability” under Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act, it said. That’s notwithstanding U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon’s recent denial of Roomster’s motions for dismissal, to stay discovery and for a protective order in which she said Section 230 doesn't shield the company from its alleged violations of federal and state consumer protection laws (see 2302030034). The plaintiffs’ claims are barred in whole or in part because the consumers they purport to protect “have enjoyed the full benefit of their purchase of services and/or products” that are the subject of the complaint, said Roomster.