§ 1798.99.22
343 words·~2 min read·
/ca/civil-code/1798-99-22A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
(A)A person who is the target of a violent post, or reasonably believes the person is the target of a violent post, may seek an order requiring the social media platform to remove the violent post and any related violent post the court determines shall be removed in the interests of justice.
(i)A person may bring an action pursuant to this paragraph before 48 hours have passed since providing notice to a social media platform pursuant to paragraph (2), but the court shall not rule on the request for an order until 48 hours have passed from the provision of notice.
(ii)The court may dismiss an action described by clause
(i)if the social media platform deletes the post before 48 hours have passed from the provision of notice.
(C)Except as provided in subparagraph (D), a person may bring an action pursuant to this paragraph at any time, and the court may rule on the request at any time, if the social media platform does not have a reporting mechanism described in Section 1798.99.21.
(D)A person shall not bring an action pursuant to this paragraph, nor shall a court issue an order requiring a social medial platform to remove a violent post or any related violent post, based upon content containing a true threat against a specific person if the date and time when the true threat that was threatened to occur has passed.
(2)If the social media platform has a reporting mechanism described in Section 1798.99.21, a person shall not bring an action pursuant to paragraph
(1)until the person has notified the social media platform of the violent post and requested that it be removed through the reporting mechanism.
(1)A court shall award court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees to a prevailing plaintiff in an action brought pursuant to this section.
(2)Reasonable attorney’s fees may be awarded to a prevailing defendant upon a finding by the court that the plaintiff’s prosecution of the action was not in good faith.