Case Explained: DOE V. WEBGROUP CZECH REPUBLIC, AS, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-12 Docket: 2:21-cv-02428-SPG-SK The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Jane Doe’s claims against WebGroup Czech Republic, a.s., and related entities for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). The court held that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes the defendants from liability because treating them as publishers or speakers of third-party content would impose a monitoring obligation. Specifically, the court reasoned that Doe’s theory of liability required WebGroup to monitor and remove child pornography to avoid profiting from it, which constitutes a quintessential publishing activity protected by Section 230. Furthermore, the court found that WebGroup’s use of neutral tools—such as tags, search functions, recommendation algorithms, and revenue-sharing schemes—did not materially contribute to the development or creation of the unlawful content, meaning the defendants did not qualify as “information content providers” under the *Roommates.com* exception. Regarding the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) claim, the court determined that the FOSTA exception to Section 230 immunity did not apply because Doe failed to adequately plead that WebGroup knowingly benefited from and knowingly assisted sex trafficking activities as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 1591. The court noted that mere association with traffickers or turning a blind eye to revenue sources is insufficient; instead, the plaintiff must allege actual knowledge of the trafficking venture and a causal relationship between affirmative conduct furthering the venture and the receipt of a benefit. The court concluded that Doe’s allegations regarding WebGroup’s profit-sharing relationships did not sufficiently establish that the channel partners recruited or solicited her as defined by statute, nor did they adequately plead that WebGroup had actual knowledge of the sex trafficking circumstances until after the videos were removed following a 2020 cease and desist letter. Consequently, Section 230 bars all claims, including those under federal child pornography statutes and California privacy law, and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss the complaint. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.