Turns Out You Can't Sue SexSearch.com If The Girl You Met Via It Is Underage

from the well-that-makes-sense dept

Another day, another case where someone tried to blame a website for the actions of its users. In this case, a guy used the website SexSearch (seriously) to find someone to have sex with (ah, the internet...). The woman he met claimed in her profile that she was 18 years old. In reality, she was apparently only 14 -- and the guy was eventually brought up on statutory rape charges. In turn, he sued SexSearch, claiming that the site had a responsibility to verify the ages of its users -- something he failed to do himself. After a district court ruling tossed out the lawsuit, an appeals court has also tossed out the lawsuit, noting that none of the various 14 claims the guy brought against the site seemed to hold up under scrutiny. Basically, as the judge in the district court noted: "Plaintiff clearly had the ability to confirm Jane Roe’s age when he met with her in person, before they had sex, yet failed to do so." Thus, it's pretty difficult for him to then claim that it was the website's responsibility to accurately verify the age of participants.

Still, as Eric Goldman notes in the link above, the appeals court differed with the lower court on one point: saying that it wasn't dismissing the case for section 230 safe harbor reasons -- which ordinarily protect a service provider from the actions of its users. The lower court felt that 230 applied, but the appeals court feared that such a ruling would extend the coverage of section 230 "potentially abrogating all state- or common-law causes of action brought against interactive Internet services." I'm not sure I agree with that at all. No one is saying that safe harbors get service providers off the hook for illegal activities they perform. The point is that they should not be responsible for illegal actions performed by their users.

Filed Under: liability, service providers
Companies: sexsearch