Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff demands AI regulation reform at Davos, challenges Section 230 protections

Salesforce CEO Challenges Tech Industry on AI Regulation at Davos

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Marc Benioff delivered an unexpectedly pointed critique of the tech industry's approach to artificial intelligence, demanding stricter regulation of artificial intelligence and fundamental changes to legal protections that shields tech companies from accountability1

1

. Speaking on a panel titled "Where Can New Growth Come From?" the Salesforce CEO posed stark questions to fellow tech leaders: "What's more important to us, growth or our kids? What's more important to us, growth or our families? Or, what's more important, growth or the fundamental values of our society?"2

2

The billionaire's comments marked a departure from the typically growth-focused discussions at the annual gathering, forcing uncomfortable conversations about morality and trust in an era of rapid technological advancement3

3

. His remarks drew particular attention given his track record as what he calls a "growth at all cost" CEO who built Salesforce from zero to more than $41 billion in revenue over 26 years.

Section 230 Reform Takes Center Stage

Benioff directed much of his criticism at Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 26-word law passed in 1996 that created the modern internet by protecting website moderators from regulation and placing content responsibility on individual users rather than host companies1

1

. "Things like Section 230 in the United States need to be reshaped because these tech companies will not be held responsible for the damage that they are basically doing to our families," Benioff stated during the panel1

1

.

The Salesforce leader has been a vocal critic of Section 230 since 2019, repeatedly calling for the legislation to be abolished1

1

. Tech giants have invoked the law as a legal defense when dealing with issues of user harm, including the 2019 case Force v. Facebook, where the court ruled the platform wasn't liable for algorithms that connected members of Hamas after the terrorist organization used the platform to encourage murder in Israel1

1

. "It's funny, tech companies, they hate regulation. They hate it except for one. They love Section 230, which basically says they're not responsible," Benioff observed2

2

.

AI-Induced Harm and Children's Safety Concerns

Benioff highlighted deeply troubling cases where dangers posed by AI have resulted in tragic consequences. "This year, you really saw something pretty horrific, which is these AI models became suicide coaches," he said at the World Economic Forum2

2

. He referenced watching a segment on the US news program 60 Minutes about Character.AI, stating: "Their model was coaching these kids to take their lives. That was something unlike I have ever seen with technology, maybe the darkest thing I've ever seen with technology"3

3

.

The comments come after allegations by a California family that ChatGPT played a role in their son's death. The lawsuit, filed in August 2025 by Matt and Maria Raine, accuses OpenAI and its chief executive, Sam Altman, of negligence and wrongful death after their son Adam died in April following what their lawyer called "months of encouragement from ChatGPT"2

2

. Character.AI and Google agreed to mediate a settlement with the mother of 14-year-old Sewell Setzer III, who died by suicide, and also agreed to settle a similar case with a Colorado family over the wrongful death of their 13-year-old daughter, Juliana Peralta3

3

.

Large Language Models Lack Context and Accountability

Benioff offered a technical critique of Large Language Models (LLMs), emphasizing their fundamental limitations. "We have to remember, in regards to this technology, these Large Language Models, you can read about people who think that they're dealing with a human. They're so incredibly responsive and interactive but they're incredibly inaccurate. They hallucinate. Nobody has 100% accuracy, and they're very unwieldy," he explained3

3

.

He drew a distinction between artificial and human intelligence, noting that LLMs "don't have childhoods, they don't have friends. So therefore, in the computer science world, we say they don't have context, they don't have the ability to take their Large Language Model and add the context into creating true intelligence. That's why it's kind of a simulated intelligence"3

3

. The law could shield tech companies from liability for harm AI platforms pose, including the production of deepfakes and AI-generated sexual abuse material1

1

.

Prioritizing Societal Values Over Unchecked Technological Growth

For Benioff, the fight to repeal Section 230 represents more than a push to regulate tech companies—it's about prioritizing societal values and children's safety over profit. "In the era of this incredible growth, we're drunk on the growth," he warned. "Let's make sure that we use this moment also to remember that we're also about values as well"1

1

. His stance aligns with growing ethical concerns surrounding AI across the political spectrum, as both Democrats and Republicans have grown skeptical of the legislation in recent years1

1

.

Dartmouth business school professor Scott Anthony voiced similar concern in a December 2025 Fortune interview, noting that with AI "we've got the technology, we're figuring out the norms, but the idea of, 'Hey, let's just keep our hands off,' I think it's just really bad"1

1

. Amid a lack of clear rules governing AI companies in the U.S., individual states including California and New York have started drawing up their own bylaws, though President Donald Trump has sought to bar those efforts via executive order2

2

. The tension between innovation and accountability on social media platforms continues to intensify as tech giants face mounting pressure to address user harm while maintaining their competitive edge in artificial intelligence development.