Why you usually cannot sue the platform
Section 230 shields websites from most claims over what their users post. Your claim is normally against the person who wrote it.
When a false post appears on a large platform, the obvious target looks like the platform itself. Federal law mostly closes that door.
What Section 230 says
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act says a website is not treated as the publisher of content its users create. A review site is generally not liable for a false review, and a social network is generally not liable for a defamatory post.
What it does not cover
- The person who wrote the post has no such protection
- Federal intellectual property claims fall outside it, which is why copyright complaints follow the separate DMCA process
- A site that writes or materially shapes the unlawful content itself can lose the shield
- Federal criminal law is not affected
How content still comes down
Platforms remove posts that break their own rules, and a well-framed complaint that cites the right policy often works. Many will also act on a court order that finds specific statements defamatory, even though the platform was never a party to the case.
What this means for strategy
The practical plan usually has two tracks. One is a policy-based removal request to the platform. The other is a claim against the author, which can produce a judgment or a settlement that includes deletion.
This article is general information about the law. It is not legal advice and reading it does not make you a client of the firm. Laws change, so speak to a lawyer about your own situation.