Carafano v. Metrosplash.com [1]

Actress Christianne Carafano (stage name Chase Masterson) sued Matchmaker.com, an internet dating site, after a user created a fake profile using Masterson's name, address, telephone number, and pictures.  

Matchmaker.com is an internet dating site that allows members to post their own profiles and search a database of other members' profiles.  Members fill out a  questionnaire, and their answers become part of their profile.  Matchmaker.com does not seek to verify the identity of  members or the accuracy of the profiles.  In addition, all members must agree to the Matchmaker Disclaimer, which prohibits users from putting their home address, e-mail address, or telephone number in their profile.

An anonymous individual created a Matchmaker.com profile under the name "Chase529."  The profile listed Carafano's home address and e-mail address, and included four pictures of her.  Among other things, the answers to the questionnaire indicated that the user was "looking for a one night stand" and "might be persuaded to have a homosexual experience."   Carafano claims that she received obscene phone calls and e-mails as a result of the profile.   

After learning about the profile, Carafano contacted the police.  Two days later, Carafano's website manager contacted Matchmaker.com.  Matchmaker.com removed Chase529's profile from its system.   Carafano subsequently sued Matchmaker.com and its corporate successors (Metrosplash.com and Lycos Inc.) for defamation, invasion of privacy through publication of private facts, violation of the right of publicity, and negligence.

Matchmaker.com claimed that it was immune from liability because of section 230 of the Communications Decency Act [2] ("Section 230").  Section 230 states that "[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."    Carafano argued that Matchmaker.com was not simply a passive service, but actually provided content since it supplied the multiple-choice questionnaire used to create profiles. 

The district court rejected Matchmaker.com's argument based on Section 230, finding that it was partly responsible for providing profile content.  The court nevertheless granted summary judgment to the defendants because Carafano had failed to raise a genuine issue of fact for essential elements of her claims.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, but on different grounds. It held that Section 230 immunized the defendants because "Matchmaker cannot be considered an 'information content provider' under the statute because no profile has any content until a user actively creates it."