SAN FRANCISCO (Legal Newsline) - Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields Meta from lawsuits over deceptive ads on Facebook, a federal court ruled, dismissing a lawsuit by a customer who said she was ripped off on a “toddler activity board” that turned out to be a cheap wooden puzzle instead.
Anastasia Groschen and Christopher Calise sued Meta over their unhappy online experiences, claiming Facebook knew or should have known the social network is rife with misleading and fraudulent ads that violate its terms of service. Groschen said she clicked through to a website named “kidspunza.com,” bought what she thought was an activity board, and was refused a refund when she complained. Calise said he never received a car engine assembly kit he bought from “miuxo.com,” a company Facebook later kicked off the site.
Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, Section 230 immunizes companies that provide an “interactive computer service” that allows third parties to communicate directly with users. Courts have repeatedly held that protection also bars lawsuits claiming the companies failed to enforce their own ad policies.
“Plaintiffs do not plead that Meta required advertisers to post specific content, made suggestions about the content of the ads, or played a role in creating the unlawful ads,” wrote U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White in an April 27 decision. “The fact that Meta cultivates relationships with advertisers and encourages them to post on its platform does not transform Meta into the creator of the allegedly illegal ad content.”
Saying he couldn’t rule out the possibility the plaintiffs would come up with some evidence Meta was involved in the creation of the ads they complained about, the judge gave them the option of amend their complaint within 21 days.