A Contractual Approach to Social Media Governance

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document. Central Thesis: The article advocates for a shift in social media governance from public law frameworks to private contract law, emphasizing the relational and dynamic nature of platform-user interactions. It proposes that platforms and users are bound by contractual relationships beyond traditional Terms of Service, encompassing community guidelines and data policies. The analysis suggests that recognizing these relationships under contract law could empower users and courts to hold platforms accountable, offering a flexible and nuanced approach to content moderation and data practices. This contractual framework could bypass certain legal immunities and provide a foundation for addressing evolving challenges in social media governance. Legal/Academic Issues Addressed: • The limitations of public law frameworks in regulating social media platforms. • The role of contract law in governing platform-user relationships. • The application of Section 230 immunity to contractual claims. • The concept of relational contracts and their implications for social media governance. • The balance between platform autonomy and user accountability. Methodologies/Data Sources: • Analysis of relational contract theory and its application to social media platforms. • Examination of Section 230 and its implications for contractual claims. • Case studies, such as *Kamco Supply Co. v. On the Right Track, LLC*, to illustrate relational contract principles. • Theoretical exploration of the "best efforts" standard in contract law. Findings/Analysis: • Platforms and users are engaged in ongoing, mutual relational contracts that go beyond traditional Terms of Service. • The "best efforts" standard in contract law offers a flexible approach to content moderation, balancing platform autonomy with accountability. • Section 230 immunity should not prevent the enforcement of contractual obligations reflecting user expectations and platform promises. • Relational contract theory emphasizes trust, solidarity, and fairness, essential for long-term platform-user relationships. • The Facebook Oversight Board exemplifies platforms' commitment to balancing free speech and safety, aligning with relational contract principles. Recommendations/Implications: • Courts should enforce relational contractual norms to hold platforms accountable for their commitments. • The "best efforts" standard should be adopted to guide platform responsibilities in content moderation. • Section 230 immunity should be reexamined to ensure it does not undermine contractual obligations. • A "platform judgment rule" could insulate platforms from judicial scrutiny for good-faith decisions, incentivizing accountability. • Equitable remedies, such as injunctions, are more suitable for addressing relational contract disputes.