Vident Partners provides vetted internet and web technology expert witnesses for cases involving Section 230 and content platforms, website accessibility under WCAG and the ADA, recommendation systems, server logs, and disputes over what a website showed or did. Request a referral today.
Find a Internet & Web Technology Expert →Overview
An internet and web technology expert decides how a website, app or online platform actually worked at the moment that matters: what the code did, what the server logged, who could see what, and which part of the system did the act in dispute. Courts get the architecture wrong when nobody explains it, and these cases often turn on one technical fact. This page covers web systems, content platforms and web accessibility. Network intrusion belongs to a cybersecurity expert, device imaging to a digital forensics examiner, and general code quality to a software engineer. Building and physical access under the ADA belong to an accessibility expert.
The statute says no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of information provided by another information content provider 1. That makes the factual question whether the platform merely hosted the material or helped create or develop it. An expert explains what the system did with a post: storage, ranking, autocomplete, templates, prompts, generated text or targeted delivery.
The law on recommendation systems is unsettled and differs by circuit. The Supreme Court took up the issue in Gonzalez v. Google (2023) and then declined to address the application of Section 230, because the complaint appeared to state little if any plausible claim 2. In Anderson v. TikTok (2024), the Third Circuit reversed in part a dismissal where an algorithm recommended a video to a child on a curated page, describing the algorithm as not based solely on a user's online inputs 3. In Doe 1 v. Meta Platforms (April 2026), a Ninth Circuit panel held Section 230 barred claims that included design-based theories about engagement-driven delivery, with concurrences questioning circuit precedent on recommendations 4.
Those opinions make specific facts matter. Was a recommendation driven by what the user did or by what the company chose? Was the ranking content-neutral? The expert needs source code, model and feature documentation, ranking logs and experiment records, under a protective order. A legal conclusion about publisher status is for the court, and the expert stays on function.
Accessibility claims divide by who is sued. State and local governments now have a specific rule. Under 28 CFR 35.200, covered public entities must make web content and mobile apps meet Level A and Level AA of WCAG 2.1, unless they can show fundamental alteration or undue burdens 5. The compliance dates moved. An interim final rule published April 20, 2026 extended the date from April 2026 to April 26, 2027 for entities of 50,000 or more, and to April 26, 2028 for smaller entities and special district governments 6. Interim rules can change, so the date of the report matters.
Private businesses have no equivalent rule. Justice Department guidance says the ADA applies to businesses open to the public, that they have flexibility in how they comply, and that existing technical standards such as WCAG and the Section 508 Standards provide helpful guidance 7. So an expert in a private-sector case tests a site against a chosen standard and must explain why that standard is a fair measure.
The work is hands-on. The guidance lists the common failures: missing text alternatives, videos without captions, online forms without usable labels, and pages that cannot be used by keyboard 7. An automated scan is a starting point. A credible audit also uses a keyboard and screen reader and records which version of the page was tested on which date, because sites change. Capture and preservation of earlier versions is often the weak point.
In almost any web case, the record is perishable. Server and application logs, content delivery records, deployment history and feature flags may be overwritten on short schedules, and a page viewed today may not be what the user saw. The expert rebuilds what was deployed on the date at issue from version control and release notes, then ties it to logs and to archived captures. Terms of service acceptance flows, cookie consent screens and pricing pages are all disputes about what a screen showed.
No license exists for web engineers. Look for hands-on experience building and operating systems of similar scale, ideally in the same type of product: a recommendation system, a marketplace, a payment page or a public agency site. For accessibility, look for an auditor who regularly tests with assistive technology and knows WCAG success criteria in detail. A strong witness can read the code, explain it plainly, and tell the jury what the logs can and cannot show.
Under 28 CFR 35.200, covered state and local governments must meet Level A and Level AA of WCAG 2.1, with compliance dates extended in April 2026 to April 26, 2027 and April 26, 2028.
Case Types
Section 230 disputes over platform design and recommendations
Website and mobile app accessibility claims under the ADA
Whether a user assented to online terms
Disputes over what a page displayed on a past date
Failed or defective website and app builds
Online pricing and consent flow disputes
Domain, hosting and uptime disputes
Search ranking and advertising technology disputes
Qualifications
Related Specialties
FAQ
There is no license for web engineers. Look for hands-on work building and running comparable systems, and the ability to read code and logs and explain them plainly. For accessibility, look for an auditor who tests with assistive technology and knows WCAG in detail.
Courts disagree. The Supreme Court declined to reach the question in Gonzalez v. Google. The Third Circuit reversed in part a Section 230 dismissal in Anderson v. TikTok, and a Ninth Circuit panel applied Section 230 to bar claims in Doe 1 v. Meta Platforms in 2026. The forum's precedent controls, and the technical facts matter.
Not a specific federal regulation. Justice Department guidance says businesses open to the public have flexibility in how they comply and points to WCAG and the Section 508 Standards as helpful guidance. Experts commonly use WCAG as the measure, and should explain why it fits the case.
Under 28 CFR 35.200 as amended by an April 2026 interim final rule, April 26, 2027 for public entities of 50,000 or more, and April 26, 2028 for smaller entities and special district governments. The technical standard is WCAG 2.1 Level AA. Check the current rule, since an interim rule can change.
By rebuilding it from version control, release notes and deployment history, then tying that to server logs and archived captures. Each source has gaps, so the expert should say what it can and cannot show about what a particular user saw.
In general, technology expert fees are determined by the expert themselves, based on a variety of criteria. Among those criteria are professional experience, forensic experience, system experience, academic qualifications, and publications. Vident does have some influence over expert fees by comparing experts within a specialty, but ultimately it is a personal decision by the expert.
Related Insights
Video conference technology has significantly changed litigation practice. We may think of it solely in the context of expert witnesses, but the technology benefits parties and lay witnesses as well....
Case AnalysisWhile public Generative AI tools are frequently used to ease administrative workloads, delegating the drafting of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) to Large Language Models (LLMs) compromises t...
Research BriefingLocal education agencies (LEAs) are operating in a worsening landscape of teacher burnout, staff shortages, frustrated families, and ever-growing administrative demands. Special education teachers who...
Sources
Vident Partners connects attorneys with qualified internet & web technology expert witnesses. Complimentary consultation, 24-hour turnaround, no obligation.
Request an Expert →