Repair Listicle

Removing Online Defamation – Slander – Libel

Q: Does the First Amendment protect someone who posts defamatory content about me online?

The First Amendment protects free speech from government restriction, but it does not give individuals unlimited license to make false statements that harm others. Defamation law exists precisely to balance free expression with the right to protect one's reputation. Understanding this distinction is critical when pursuing the removal of false or damaging content online.

Q: Why can't I just force a website like Google or Facebook to remove defamatory content about me?

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields Internet Service Providers and platforms from legal liability for content posted by third-party users, making it very difficult to compel them to remove defamatory material. This protection was originally intended to encourage free expression online, but it can also be exploited by bad actors and large platforms alike. It remains one of the primary legal obstacles in online defamation removal cases.

Q: Could Section 230 protections for websites change in the future?

Yes, Section 230 has faced growing scrutiny from lawmakers and members of the judiciary. In early 2021, Justice Clarence Thomas publicly questioned whether large digital platforms should be treated more like common carriers, which would significantly limit their Section 230 protections. Prominent defamation attorney Aaron Minc has described Section 230 as the 'linchpin' of the Internet, underscoring how consequential any changes to it would be.

Q: Can copyright law be used as a tool to remove defamatory content online?

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), passed in 1998, extended copyright protections into the digital world to prevent content from being stolen and republished without attribution. In some cases, it can serve as a practical mechanism for requesting the removal of certain online content when copyright ownership can be established. However, it is designed to protect intellectual property rather than reputation, so its applicability in defamation cases is situational.

Q: What is the legal difference between slander, libel, and defamation?

Defamation is the broader legal term for a false statement made by a third party that damages someone's reputation. Slander refers specifically to spoken defamatory statements, while libel refers to written or published ones — meaning most harmful online content would typically fall under libel. Some states also recognize 'false light' claims, which address misleading but not strictly false portrayals of an individual.

Understanding these 5 areas of law could be the difference between a damaged reputation and reclaiming control of your online presence.

Kent Campbell February 19, 2016 · Updated February 20, 2026 · 1 min read

Web reputations are fragile things. Sometimes it's necessary to leverage various legal strategies to support or attack a particular position. These five areas of the law may help your web reputation campaign.

Key Takeaways

Individuals, business owners, and professionals dealing with damaging online content who need to understand their legal options.

The First Amendment protects most online speech unless a specific legal exception clearly applies.
Section 230 of the CDA shields platforms like Google and Yelp from liability for third-party content.
Section 230 is under political pressure from both parties and may face significant changes.
The DMCA offers a separate legal avenue to request removal of certain online content.
Defamation, libel, slander, and false light are distinct legal concepts with different standards of proof.

TL;DR

Removing online defamation requires understanding the legal landscape that governs what can and cannot be taken down. Five key areas of law — including the First Amendment, Section 230 of the CDA, and the DMCA — shape what options are available to those harmed by false or damaging content. Knowing how these laws interact helps individuals and businesses build a more effective online reputation defense strategy.

Freedom of Speech / The First Amendment to the Constitution

The First Amendment is probably the most widely invoked legal concept in America, stating that 'Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.' It applies to the actions of state and local governments as well as the federal government. It's helpful to look at it as a backstop that governs how far courts and governments can go in limiting speech, whether online or in other media. If you can't make a convincing case that a nuance, limitation, or exception applies to something posted about you online, whoever posted it is probably on firm legal ground.

The Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA)

The CDA was originally drafted to restrict the distribution of Internet pornography, but one critically important part remains: Section 230. Section 230 states that no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. This means ISPs, Google, Yelp, and social media sites like Facebook are all largely immune from legal claims related to third-party content. There is currently much debate about strengthening or weakening Section 230, and its most extreme interpretations are being tested in courts.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)

Passed in 1998, the DMCA extended globally accepted copyright protection protocols into the digital world, protecting content creators from having their material stolen and republished without attribution. Like Section 230, the DMCA limits the liability of ISPs and publishers that aggregate third-party content, so lawsuits against such entities aren't always straightforward. If your original work has been reprinted without permission, you can expedite its removal with a DMCA takedown notice, circumventing the courts entirely. If your work has been used in a defamatory fashion, you may also be able to use the DMCA to have Google remove the content from their system.

Different types of defamation, false light, slander, and libel

Defamation is a false statement made by a third party, often for the purpose of undercutting the subject's reputation, with 'slander' and 'libel' describing verbal and written forms respectively. For non-public figures, defamation exists if a statement can be proven harmful to the individual's reputation, regardless of malicious intent, while public figures must prove actual malice. 'False light' is a related concept describing a statement that, while not technically false, is intentionally misleading and negative, and is only valid in some jurisdictions. If someone posts something untrue or misleading in a damaging way about you online, you may be able to sue them.

Laws and precedents pertaining to the removal of negative online content

There is a wide scope of laws and court decisions concerning the posting and removal of negative reviews, images, and other content online. Some states like California, Utah, Oregon, and Georgia have moved to restrict the distribution of mug shots and booking photos, and California has passed a law compelling website owners to provide an 'eraser button' for minors who wish to remove embarrassing self-posted content. The European Union introduced the 'right to be forgotten,' representing a major change to digital laws regarding the removal of personal information online. These laws vary significantly by jurisdiction and offer varying degrees of protection for individuals seeking to manage their online reputations.

Share this article

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the First Amendment protect someone who posts defamatory content about me online?

Why can't I just force a website like Google or Facebook to remove defamatory content about me?

Could Section 230 protections for websites change in the future?

Can copyright law be used as a tool to remove defamatory content online?

What is the legal difference between slander, libel, and defamation?

Written by

Kent Campbell

Kent Campbell is the chief strategist for Reputation X, an award-winning online reputation management agency. He has over 15 years of experience with SEO, Wikipedia editing, review management, and online reputation strategy. Kent has helped celebrities, leaders, executives, and marketing professionals improve the way they are seen online. Kent writes about reputation, SEO, Wikipedia, and PR-related topics, and is an expert witness for reputation-related legal matters.

Website LinkedIn Twitter