The article examines the EU's Digital Services Act, which enhances user rights and transparency, and contrasts it with US approaches shaped by Supreme Court decisions like Moody v. NetChoice.
It highlights how the EU imposes stricter obligations on platforms to address hate speech and misinformation, while US constitutional doctrines limit government intervention and shape regulatory options.
The analysis explores whether these regulatory differences could fragment the internet, assesses current detection technologies, and calls for further research on legal responses to online hate and misinformation.
How will conflicting US and EU internet regulations ultimately affect the average user?
Will the EU's Digital Services Act inevitably become the world's online safety standard?
Who is legally responsible when a platform’s AI recommends harmful or illegal content?
Can online child safety laws be effective without creating mass surveillance and privacy risks?
Can lawsuits targeting platform design finally break through Section 230's liability shield?
As AI moderation advances, is failing to stop hate speech now a deliberate choice?