Human rights groups cheer ‘watershed’ verdict in social media addiction trial社群媒體成癮：劃時代的判決
聆聽課程
0:00
0:00
#1
Human Rights Organizations Hail 'Watershed' Verdict in Social Media Addiction Trial
人權組織讚揚社群媒體成癮案中具有「分水嶺」意義的判決
#2
A Los Angeles jury has found Meta and YouTube liable for deliberately engineering addictive platforms, in a verdict that human rights groups are calling a watershed moment.
洛杉磯陪審團裁定 Meta 和 YouTube 因蓄意設計具成癮性的平台而負有法律責任，人權團體稱此判決為分水嶺時刻。
#3
The landmark trial concluded with jurors determining that both companies intentionally designed features that hooked a young user and caused significant harm.
這場具里程碑意義的審判以陪審員認定兩家公司皆蓄意設計了讓年輕用戶上癮並造成重大傷害的功能而告終。
#4
Amnesty International emphasized that the court decision confirms these platforms are fundamentally unsafe by design.
國際特赦組織強調，法院的裁決證實了這些平台在設計上從根本上就是不安全的。
#5
The six-week trial centered on a plaintiff identified only by the initials KGM, now twenty years old, who testified that she became addicted to YouTube at age six.
這場為期六週的審判集中在一名僅以縮寫 KGM 識別的原告身上，她現年二十歲，並作證說她在六歲時就對 YouTube 成癮。
#6
She alleged that her subsequent use of Instagram at nine triggered a devastating cycle of depression, self-harm, and body dysmorphia.
她指控說，她在九歲時隨後對 Instagram 的使用，引發了憂鬱、自殘和身體畸形恐懼症的毀滅性惡性循環。
#7
The jury awarded six million dollars in damages, with Meta ordered to pay seventy percent and YouTube the remainder.
陪審團裁定賠償六百萬美元，其中 Meta 被勒令支付百分之七十，其餘部分由 YouTube 支付。
#8
Plaintiffs in the case argued that features such as infinite scroll and autoplay prioritize user engagement over well-being, particularly for vulnerable young audiences.
本案原告主張，如無限捲動和自動播放等功能，將用戶參與度置於福祉之上，特別是針對脆弱的年輕受眾。
#9
Had these design choices not been implemented, advocates contend, the plaintiff's exposure to harmful content would have been substantially reduced.
倡導者主張，若當初沒有實施這些設計選擇，原告接觸有害內容的機會將會大幅減少。
#10
This trial is one of more than twenty bellwether cases expected to proceed through the courts in the coming years.
這場審判是預計在未來幾年內進入法院程序的二十多起指標性案件之一。
#11
Not all observers, however, share the same enthusiasm regarding the verdict's broader implications.
然而，並非所有觀察家都對該裁決更廣泛的影響抱持同樣的熱忱。
#12
Some privacy advocates have cautioned that holding platforms accountable for addictive design could inadvertently justify more invasive age-verification measures.
一些隱私倡導者警告說，要求平台對成癮性設計負責，可能會在無意中為更具侵入性的年齡驗證措施提供正當理由。
#13
Were governments to mandate stricter identity checks, critics warn, the resulting data collection might undermine the very privacy protections that digital rights organizations have long championed.
批評人士警告說，如果政府強制執行更嚴格的身分檢查，由此產生的數據收集可能會破壞數位權利組織長期以來所捍衛的隱私保護。
#14
International tech freedom organizations have urged social media companies to redesign their platforms rather than rely on blunt tools such as outright bans for young users.
國際科技自由組織已敦促社群媒體公司重新設計其平台，而非依賴如對年輕用戶實施全面禁令這類生硬的工具。
#15
They insist that it is imperative that companies prioritize child safety without compromising fundamental digital freedoms.
他們堅持認為，公司必須在不損害基本數位自由的情況下，優先考慮兒童安全。
#16
Whether this verdict will catalyze meaningful industry reform or merely prompt cosmetic adjustments remains to be seen.
這項判決是否會催化有意義的產業改革，抑或僅僅引發表面上的調整，仍有待觀察。