Holding Websites Accountable for Hosting Revenge Porn

Platforms Are Not Always Off the Hook

When someone shares your intimate images online without your permission, your first thought is usually about the person who posted them. But what about the website that’s hosting them? Many victims feel outraged that a platform would allow such harmful material to remain accessible. While it’s true that the law protects platforms in some situations, that protection is not unlimited.

Websites can sometimes be held responsible, especially if they ignore valid takedown requests, profit from the content, or knowingly allow the abuse to continue. Our sexual abuse attorneys have pursued cases where victims didn’t just sue the offender, they also pressured platforms to act. At Horn Wright, LLP, we know that holding websites accountable can mean faster removal, broader justice, and stronger compensation for the harm you’ve endured.

The Role of Section 230 in Online Liability

If you’ve researched online liability, you’ve probably seen references to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (47 U.S.C. § 230). This federal law protects online platforms from being treated as the “publisher” of third-party content. In plain terms, it means if a user posts something illegal, the site usually isn’t responsible.

But there are limits. Courts have held that Section 230 does not shield platforms when:

• They materially contribute to the illegal conduct, such as editing or promoting the content.
• They profit directly from unlawful content, for example through ad revenue on adult website revenge porn forums.
• They fail to comply with federal intellectual property laws like copyright under 17 U.S.C. § 512 (DMCA).

Understanding the scope and limits of Section 230 is crucial. While it offers websites broad protection, it doesn’t give them a free pass to ignore abuse. With the right strategy, victims can still demand accountability.

New York’s Remedies for Victims Against Hosting Sites

New York law gives victims stronger remedies than many other states. Under Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51, victims can sue not only the person who shared the images but also pursue relief that indirectly forces platforms to take down content. Courts may grant injunctions ordering removal, even if the site itself isn’t named as a defendant.

For victims, this means:

• You can demand court-ordered takedowns. Judges can compel websites to act, especially if they’re accessible in New York.
• You can recover damages from the individual, while simultaneously securing removal orders that impact the platform.
• You may combine state remedies with federal laws like the DMCA to push platforms into compliance.

New York’s approach recognizes that it’s not enough to punish offenders alone. True relief often requires forcing platforms to participate in the solution.

When Websites Can Be Forced to Remove Content

Websites aren’t invincible. There are specific circumstances where they can be compelled to remove material:

• Compliance with injunctions. New York courts regularly issue injunctions requiring removal of intimate images. If a site is served with such an order and refuses to comply, it risks contempt of court. These orders are powerful tools that shift accountability directly onto the platform.
• DMCA takedown notices. If you created the photo or video, you can assert copyright ownership and file a takedown request under 17 U.S.C. § 512. Even large social media platforms must comply. This is especially effective in social media revenge porn cases where content spreads quickly.
• Violation of platform policies. Many sites now have explicit bans on non-consensual intimate imagery. When they fail to enforce their own policies, they expose themselves to reputational harm and sometimes liability. Legal pressure can force them to act consistently.

By combining court orders, federal law, and internal policy enforcement, victims can often succeed in removing harmful content that once felt untouchable.

New Hampshire Provides Weaker Legal Avenues Against Websites Compared to New York

Not every state equips victims with the same level of protection. In New Hampshire, revenge porn is criminalized, but victims face limited civil remedies when it comes to forcing platforms to act. Courts there rarely issue broad injunctions against sites, and victims often rely solely on federal law like the DMCA.

In contrast, New York courts take a more expansive view. They issue injunctions against platforms, recognize broader emotional harm, and combine civil rights statutes with takedown enforcement. This makes New York one of the stronger states for pursuing relief when platforms are slow or unwilling to respond.

For victims whose cases cross state lines, establishing jurisdiction in New York can make a decisive difference in outcomes.

How to Build a Case That Includes Platform Responsibility

Adding a website into your revenge porn case takes careful planning. You can’t just sue a platform directly in every situation, but you can structure your case so the platform becomes legally compelled to act.

Here’s how attorneys build those cases:

• They start with the primary defendant, the person who shared the content, and use New York’s civil rights statutes to establish harm. This opens the door to injunctions that name the platform as a necessary participant in removal.
• They layer in federal remedies like the DMCA when the victim owns the copyright. That forces platforms to act independently of the offender.
• They document repeated failures by the site to enforce its own policies. In extreme cases, platforms that knowingly profit from blackmail revenge porn or non-consensual material may be exposed to further liability.

By weaving these threads together, attorneys create pressure not just on the offender but also on the platform, ensuring removal and accountability.

Why Website Accountability Strengthens Justice

Holding a single offender responsible is important, but it doesn’t always end the harm. If the content remains online, the damage continues day after day. That’s why including platforms in the legal strategy is so vital.

Website accountability strengthens justice because:

• It removes the material at its source, limiting future harm.
• It deters platforms from ignoring future complaints.
• It validates the victim’s experience, showing that the system responds not only to individuals but also to the infrastructure that enables abuse.

Justice in revenge porn cases isn’t just about punishment. It’s about stopping the cycle of harm. And platforms play a major role in that cycle.

Horn Wright, LLP, Holds Online Platforms Responsible

Victims often assume nothing can be done about the websites hosting their images. That assumption isn’t true. Our sexual abuse attorneys know how to use a mix of state and federal law to force platforms to act, whether through injunctions, DMCA notices, or direct legal pressure.

At Horn Wright, LLP, we’ve helped victims in cases involving social media exposure, adult site postings, workplace-related distribution, and blackmail threats. In each, removing the content was just as important as punishing the offender. If you're ready to hire one of the best law firms in America, we’ll pursue not only the person who hurt you but also the platforms that allowed it to continue.