HOLOMAXX TECHNOLOGIES v. Microsoft Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• acknowledging that a provider’s subjective determination of what constitutes objectionable material under § 230(c)(2) is not limitless, but finding that the harassing emails in that case were reasonably objectionable
• acknowledging that a provider’s subjective determination of what constitutes 16 ENIGMA SOFTWARE V. MALWAREBYTES objectionable material under § 230(c)(2) is not limitless, but finding that the harassing emails in that case were reasonably objectionable
• dismissing claim where plaintiff’s “allegations are both conclusory and devoid 19 of factual support”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).