One of the realities of running an online adult business is that you’re always operating inside a legal framework that can either protect your platform or expose it to serious risk.
Just like social media networks and e-commerce platforms, adult industry websites rely on U.S. internet law to operate at scale—especially because the United States remains the largest consumer market for online adult content.
At Adult Site Broker, we track the political and legal trends that affect adult website owners, creators, and publishers worldwide. And one law sits at the center of nearly every “platform liability” debate in the U.S.: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Why Are We Writing About Section 230 Again?
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (1996) is often described as the legal backbone of the modern internet. In practical terms, it generally protects online platforms from being treated as the “publisher” of user-posted content—while also preserving their ability to moderate content under their own rules.
That matters for adults for a simple reason: most adult platforms handle user activity, uploads, comments, creator pages, profiles, forums, messaging, and all the messiness that comes with scale. Section 230 helps keep liability aimed at the bad actor rather than the platform.
For example, if a user posts illegal content such as CSAM to a tube site, the platform can remove it, ban the account, and report it to authorities. Industry groups and resources like the Association of Sites Advocating for Child Protection (ASACP) and the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children play important roles in reporting workflows and compliance culture across the broader ecosystem.
But Section 230 has also become politically radioactive. Critics on different sides argue—often for very different reasons—that platforms have too much power over speech, moderation, and what content gets amplified.
Gonzalez v. Google and the Supreme Court
In early 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Gonzalez v. Google, a case that many believed could reshape Section 230.
The family of Nohemi Gonzalez—killed in the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks—argued that Google (through YouTube) should bear legal responsibility because YouTube’s recommendation systems allegedly helped amplify extremist content.
Our friends at YNOT.com followed the case closely because the stakes were so high for platform liability, especially for adult platforms that rely on moderation, community features, and user interactions.
Why Does It Matter?
The key Section 230 issue in Gonzalez was whether recommendation algorithms (the systems that suggest content to users) should be treated differently than “hosting” content.
The argument was straightforward: if recommendations are treated as the platform’s own speech or publishing activity, then Section 230 protections could narrow dramatically. That would change the risk calculus for any site that organizes, ranks, recommends, or “personalizes” content—including adult sites.
What Actually Happened
On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court declined to rule on the scope of Section 230 in Gonzalez. Instead, the Court sent the case back in light of its decision in Twitter v. Taamneh, which addressed terrorism-related secondary liability under the Anti-Terrorism Act and rejected broad theories of platform responsibility tied to generally available services and “content-neutral” recommendations.
In other words: Section 230 survived this moment without being rewritten by the Court. The bigger debate—reform, narrowing, or repeal—remains primarily a political and legislative fight.
Free Speech, Sex, and Adult Platforms
Adult sites have a unique problem: even when content is legal and consensual, it is often treated as “high-risk” by payment processors, hosting providers, mainstream ad networks, and social platforms. If Section 230 protections were narrowed in a way that pressures platforms to over-remove content, adult sites would likely feel that impact early and aggressively.
We’ve already seen how legal shifts can reshape the landscape. For example, FOSTA-SESTA changed incentives across online platforms, especially those tied to sex work and adult communities—often in ways that created collateral damage without solving the core problems lawmakers claimed to target.
Why Adult Site Owners Should Pay Attention
Even though the Supreme Court avoided a direct Section 230 ruling in Gonzalez, this issue is not going away. The next major shift is more likely to come from:
- Congress (new federal legislation affecting platform liability)
- State-level laws that attempt to regulate age verification, moderation, or distribution
- New lawsuits are designed to force courts to draw lines around algorithms, recommendations, and moderation
For adult business owners, the takeaway is simple: platform liability debates are not abstract. They can directly impact what you can host, how you can moderate, how you can rank content, and how much legal risk your business carries.
Read more from the Adult Site Broker Blog:
- What Is Section 230 and Why Should I Care?
- Understanding Adult Industry Censorship on Social Media Platforms Like Instagram
- Sexuality Censorship, Law & Adult Entertainment
Adult Site Broker thanks you for reading this blog post. If you’re interested in finding out more about buying or selling websites, please contact us here.
