Marketplace Morning Report's new Skin in the Game series explores what we can learn about

money and careers from the $300 billion video game industry. Plus, here how an Oakland-based

program helps young people get the skills they need to break into this booming industry.

Listen to Skin in the Game and more from the Marketplace Morning Report wherever you get your

podcasts. A 27-year-old law is still shaping the internet. From American public media,

this is Marketplace Tech. I'm Megan McCarty-Korino.

The Supreme Court gave a win to Big Tech yesterday and avoided weighing in on the limits of a

key piece of tech law called Section 230. It shields internet companies from liability for user

content, but has become a target for legal challenges and political attacks. Now artificial

intelligence tools are raising new questions. Former Congressman Chris Cox co-authored the law

back in 1996 and says it's held up. Because there are always trade-offs involved and no legislative

solution will be perfect, in the main the law has worked and it has largely worked to ensure

that people have an opportunity to post content and to read others content in ways that they

would not have had because no one would have been willing to take on that liability. In the 1990s,

as today, there are trade-offs involved and as Congress now looks at new cutting-edge issues,

they're going to go through the same exercise a new, I think, and make new trade-offs that will

hopefully protect free speech and hopefully give people more access to information, not less.

But we'll see. We'll see where it all ends up. Right, it feels like we're sort of at another

inflection point with these new, generative, artificial intelligence tools like chat GPT.

In your view, does Section 230 protect speech generated by these tools?

The way it is written does not protect it because Section 230 proceeds on the certain premise that

the content creator is liable. So chat GPT literally makes things up what they call hallucinations.

...