US Section 230 (Communications Decency Act)

US law shielding online platforms from liability for user-generated content and content moderation decisions.

Enacted in 1996 as part of the Communications Decency Act, Section 230 has been called the twenty-six words that created the internet. Its core provision states that no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of information provided by another content provider. This legal shield means that online platforms, from social media networks to review sites and marketplaces, are generally not liable for content posted by their users, a protection that has enabled the growth of the modern internet economy.

Section 230 also provides a complementary protection for good-faith content moderation. Platforms may restrict access to material they consider obscene, harassing, or otherwise objectionable without losing their liability protection. This dual shield, immunity from publisher liability and freedom to moderate, has allowed platforms to develop diverse content policies without facing the legal exposure that traditional publishers endure. The provision applies to any interactive computer service, which courts have interpreted broadly to include websites, apps, email services, and cloud platforms.

The scope of Section 230 protection is subject to important exceptions. It does not apply to federal criminal law, intellectual property claims, or electronic communications privacy law. The Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA-SESTA), enacted in 2018, created an additional exception for conduct that facilitates sex trafficking. These carve-outs mean that while Section 230 provides broad civil liability protection, it is not absolute, and platforms remain responsible for their own content and for certain categories of unlawful material.

Section 230 has become one of the most debated technology policy issues in the United States. Critics from across the political spectrum have called for reform, though for different reasons: some argue that platforms do too little to moderate harmful content, while others contend that platforms over-moderate and suppress protected speech. Multiple legislative proposals have sought to narrow Section 230 immunity, impose transparency requirements, or condition protection on platforms meeting certain content moderation standards. As of 2025, no comprehensive reform has been enacted, but the debate continues to shape the regulatory environment for online platforms.

Internationally, Section 230 stands in contrast to the EU's Digital Services Act, which replaces the broad liability shield approach with a detailed system of graded obligations, transparency requirements, and risk assessments. Businesses operating platforms in both jurisdictions must navigate fundamentally different legal frameworks for content liability and moderation. For companies in the US digital services space, Section 230 remains a critical legal foundation, but its future scope and conditions are increasingly uncertain.

Select your company type for tailored compliance guidance.