550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 268,629 times 366 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "
Holding that CDA bars claims for negligence and gross negligence in not preventing a 13 year old girl from lying about her age to create a personal profile that led to contact by a sexual predator
Holding CDA immunity applied even though “AOL unreasonably delayed in removing defamatory messages posted by an unidentified third party, refused to post retractions of those messages, and failed to screen for similar postings thereafter”
Holding that defendant was immune to the defamation claim when it made its own editorial decisions with respect to third-party information published on its website
Holding that a dating site could not "be considered an 'information content provider' under the [CDA] because no profile has any content until a user actively creates it"
Holding that website operator did not become information content provider “merely because the ‘construct and operation’ of the web site might have some influence on the content of the postings” or because website simply “provided ‘culpable assistance’ to subscribers wishing to disseminate misinformation”
Holding that § 230 "bars lawsuits seeking to hold a service provider liable for its exercise of a publisher's traditional editorial functions -- such as deciding whether to publish, withdraw, postpone, or alter content"