Supreme Court Denies Grindr Lawsuit Appeal

Supreme Court Denies Grindr Lawsuit Appeal

CYBERSPACE — Earlier this year, the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled against Matthew Herrick, a New Yorker who sued Grindr, alleging the company failed to take action when an ex-boyfriend used the hookup app to send 1,200 men to his home in an apparent harassment campaign. Herrick’s lawyer, Carrie A Goldberg, appealed that decision; this week, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case and Goldberg reacted poorly.

The original 3-0 decision against Herrick rejected claims of negligence against Grindr, whose attorney, Daniel Waxman, persuaded the court that the company is immune from liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996, the federal law that shields companies from liability for publishing third-party content.

Herrick’s suit against Grindr had been closely watched by the adult industry, particularly in the wake of FOSTA-SESTA, as it carried the potential to make tech companies legally liable for actions carried out by users of their platforms.

“The party at fault here was Herrick's ex-boyfriend, but it was Grindr that Herrick chose to take to court. The case was not argued well. The allegations contained suppositions that were pretty much impossible to reconcile,” observed TechDirt.com.

Legal scholar and law professor Eric Goldman tweeted a quick summary. “It's not the least bit surprising, but today SCOTUS denied cert in Herrick v. Grindr, a significant [Section 230] defense-favorable ruling,” he wrote.

Goldberg retweeted Goldman’s message and added the following commentary: “Sure would be a shame if somebody misused a dating app to send men to this guy's home as happened 1200+ times to our client, Matthew.”

TechDirt called her reply “bizarre and inappropriate,” while law blogger Scott H. Greenfield described it as “inexcusable.”

“So Carrie Goldberg would call on her Twitter followers to attack a law (professor), as her client was attacked by some sick guy he picked on Grindr, for disagreeing with her legal position?” Greenfield asked. He acknowledged Goldberg might have been merely “venting.”

“But when a lawyer calls for an attack on a (professor) whose commentary disputes her legal theory — ‘destroy Goldman like my client was destroyed by his ex-boyfriend’ — we’ve reached a new depth,” he said.

TechDirt notes the “unfortunate side effect” of recent legal arguments against Section 230 immunity. “It's become increasingly popular to blame the immunity for the deeds and words of third-party users. This, of course, makes no sense,” they note. “But the alternative is to recognize users are responsible for their own conduct and content and that unfortunate truth simply won't suffice when there's lawsuits to be filed.”

If Section 230 is weakened or destroyed, “the services and platforms Section 230 opponents seem to believe will become better will actually become more restrictive or cease to exist,” they continue. “And crude reactions like Goldberg's are exactly the sort of thing that will disappear fastest if platforms can be sued for things their users have said.”

At post time, Goldberg’s tweet was still up.

Related:  

Copyright © 2025 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

UPDATED: Supreme Court Rules Against Adult Industry in Pivotal Texas AV Case

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday issued its decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, striking a blow against the online adult industry by ruling in support of Texas’ controversial age verification law, HB 1181.

North Carolina Passes Extreme Bill Targeting Adult Sites

The North Carolina state legislature this week ratified a bill that would impose new regulations that industry observers have warned could push adult websites and platforms to ban most adult creators and content.

Supreme Court Ruling Due Friday in FSC v. Paxton AV Case

The U.S. Supreme Court will rule on Friday in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the adult industry trade association's challenge to Texas’ controversial age verification law, HB 1181.

Ofcom: More Porn Providers Commit to Age Assurance Measures

A number of adult content providers operating in the U.K. have confirmed that they plan to introduce age checks in compliance with the Online Safety Act by the July 25 deadline, according to U.K. media regulator Ofcom.

Aylo Says It Will Comply With UK Age Assurance Requirements

Tech and media company Aylo, which owns various adult properties including Pornhub, YouPorn and Redtube, plans to introduce age assurance methods in the United Kingdom that satisfy government rules under the Online Safety Act, the company has announced.

Kyrgyzstan Parliament Approves Measure Outlawing Internet Porn

The Supreme Council of Kyrgyzstan on Wednesday passed legislation outlawing online adult content in the country.

Trial Set for Lawsuit by U Wisconsin Professor Fired Over Adult Content

A trial date of June 22, 2026, has been set for the civil lawsuit filed by veteran communications professor Joe Gow against the University of Wisconsin board of regents, which fired him for creating and appearing in adult content.

New UK Task Force Meets to Target Adult Content

The architect of an influential report that recommended banning adult content deemed “degrading, violent and misogynistic” has convened an “Independent Pornography Review task force” aimed at translating that report’s findings into action in the U.K.

11:11 Creations Launches Affiliate Program

11:11 Creations principal Alicia Silver has launched 11:11 Cash for creators and affiliates.

Pineapple Support, Pornhub to Host 'Self Love' Support Group

Pineapple Support and Pornhub are hosting a free online support group for performers to develop self-love.

Show More