Grindr Uses Section 230 to Dodge Suit Over Sexual Abuse of User

Grindr Inc. escaped a lawsuit alleging the LGBTQ+ dating app contained design defects that allowed an under-age user to meet adults who sexually assaulted him.

US District Judge Otis Wright on Thursday dismissed the suit brought by a Canadian who was 15-years-old when he started using the app, finding that the plaintiff ultimately sought to hold Grindr liable for the actions of its users, which is barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

“The facts of this case are indisputably alarming and tragic,” the judge said. “No one should endure what Plaintiff has.”

But Section 230’s expansive platform immunity requires dismissal, Wright wrote in an opinion for the US District Court for the Central District of California.

The “John Doe” plaintiff, who feared telling his parents that he was gay, first downloaded the app in 2019 to find a queer community. The app didn’t verify his age, which requires that users be older than 18. Grindr connected the plaintiff with four adult men, and the plaintiff said he separately met the men, who each sexually assaulted and raped him. Three of the men are now in prison for sex crimes, and one remains at large.

The lawsuit filed against Grindr this spring argued the app is a dangerously designed software product and the company knows sexual predators use the platform to connect with minors. The complaint also alleged the app violated federal anti-sex trafficking laws by facilitating sex crimes against children.

The judge was unconvinced by the product liability claims—a novel legal theory being advanced by plaintiff’s attorneys in an effort to get around the liability shield created by Section 230. That 1996 law blocks lawsuits against internet platforms based on content or actions of third-party users.

The lawsuit cited the design of the Grindr app, not the actions of its users, is the basis for the product liability claim, but Wright rejected that approach.

“Ultimately, although Doe frames Grindr’s minimal age verification and user matching functions as a product defect, Doe’s claims seek to hold Grindr liable based on its publishing of user content,” the judge said.

Wright also found the suit’s sex trafficking claims were blocked by Section 230 despite a 2018 amendment to the law that was meant to create an exception for civil sex trafficking cases. Under Ninth Circuit precedent, “merely turning a blind eye” to alleged sex trafficking isn’t enough to bypass the immunity, the judge said.

CA Goldberg PLLC represents the plaintiff. Davis Wright Tremain LLP represents Grindr.

The case is John Doe v. Grindr Inc., C.D. Cal., No. 2:23-cv-02093, 12/28/23.