Estimated read time: 2-3 minutes
- A judge denied TikTok's request to dismiss Utah's consumer protection lawsuit.
- TikTok argued that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protected it from liability, among other things.
- The case will proceed to trial after a 3rd District Court judge disagreed and denied the motion to dismiss.
SALT LAKE CITY — A Utah lawsuit against TikTok will be allowed to move forward after a judge on Tuesday denied a request from the social media giant that sought to have the consumer protection case dismissed.
Attorney General Sean Reyes celebrated the ruling as a "crucial step forward in our battle against the harmful practices of TikTok," and the director of the state's Department of Commerce promised to continue to protect children from what the state has alleged are harmful features on the platform.
Utah sued TikTok — which is owned by the Chinese company ByteDance — last October, alleging that the platform harms young users and that the company is in violation of the state's Consumer Sales Practices Act. In December, TikTok filed a motion to dismiss that lawsuit, arguing that it is protected from liability under Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act, that the state lacks personal jurisdiction over the case, that Utah's consumer protection law is too vague, and that the consumer protection does not apply because users can use the app for free.
Utah 3rd District Court Judge Richard Daynes disagreed, writing that Utah does have jurisdiction, that the Consumer Sales Practices Act does apply and that TikTok is not immune from Utah's claims due to Section 230.
That section, he notes, provides that "interactive computer service" providers are not treated as publishers or speakers of information that is shared on their platforms. But, in the case of Utah's lawsuit, Daynes said TikTok is not considered content-neutral because the company's algorithms promote certain content to users.
"Although TikTok distributes third-party content, the (Division of Consumer Protection's) claims are based on the defendant's own actions employing features and practices that target children, resulting in excessive usage of their platforms, and making misleading statements about the safety of those platforms," he writes.
As for the argument that the use of TikTok is not a "consumer transaction," Daynes wrote that "this court is not convinced ... that the Utah Legislature intended to exclude transactions that did not include the exchange of money or involved an actual sale based on the language used to define a 'consumer transaction.'"
He also found that Utah's lawsuit is not an infringement on TikTok's right to free speech, because the complaint "does not seek to curtail any speech but rather to curtail the addictive features challenged."
"We are thrilled with the court's ruling," Reyes said. "We refuse to let a social media giant evade responsibility for its role in fostering addiction and exposing our children to multifarious threats."
"TikTok's deceptive practices must be addressed, and we will continue our fight to ensure the welfare of Utah's children is prioritized," Margaret Busse, executive director of the Department of Commerce, added.
A spokesperson for TikTok did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
With the ruling, the case is cleared to continue for a full trial on the allegations.
