LAW.COM - Jan 7 - Whether a website should face accountability for the actions of its users is getting new examination in a harassment suit against Grindr. Attorney Tor Ekeland described Grindr as "a targeting system" that tracked a harassment victim's geolocation despite him not having the app. But opposing counsel from Bryan Cave says even if Grindr "somehow magically tracked people," it would still get Section 230 immunity. Arguing Monday before a three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, attorney Tor Ekeland asked to revive a suit in which his client alleges an ex-boyfriend created a fake Grindr account under the client's name, then used the profile to send app users to the client's house and workplace. The suit was previously tossed under immunity granted to online services for third-party created content via Section 230 of the Stored Communications Act (CDA). Ekeland said that alleged stalkers used competitors to Grindr to stalk his client, and that the competitors addressed his client's concerns right away. The lawsuit also argued that information that was used to allegedly harass the plaintiff - including "categories in its drop-down menus" portraying him "as interested in hardcore sex" - were created by Grindr and thus outside the scope of the CDA. Grindr's counsel, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner partner Daniel Waxman characterized the suit as a "straightforward CDA case."