This is the second of three posts examining Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, commonly known as §230. While the law was enacted with the best of intentions to allow the internet to flourish, it has been misconstrued by courts for decades and is being taken advantage of by Big Tech companies. This post examines how the courts have wrongfully interpreted §230, straying far from the plain meaning of the text. The first post examined the events that led to §230’s enactment, its short legislative history, and what the law actually says. The final post will consider solutions to fixing §230, and which might be the most advantageous from a constitutional and policy perspective.