Match Group Sued for Allegedly Enabling Serial Rapist on Dating Apps
A lawsuit filed Tuesday accuses Match Group, teh parent company of Tinder and Hinge, of fostering a hazardous environment for users by failing too adequately protect them from known sexual predators. Six women, who were drugged and sexually assaulted or raped by the same Denver cardiologist, allege the company was negligent in allowing Stephen Matthews to remain active on its platforms despite multiple reports, effectively “accommodating rapists across its products.”
The civil complaint, backed by four law firms, contends that Match Group prioritized profit over user safety, creating a space where abusers could thrive. According to the lawsuit, the company was aware of the risk posed by individuals like Matthews but continued to “welcome them, fail to warn users about the general and specific risks, and affirmatively recommend known predators to members.”
The allegations stem from a years-long pattern of abuse perpetrated by Matthews, who was sentenced in October 2024 to 158 years to life in prison after being convicted of 35 counts of drugging and/or sexually assaulting 11 women between 2019 and 2023. The six plaintiffs are proceeding anonymously to protect their identities.
The lawsuit cites an 18-month inquiry by the Dating App Reporting Project, published in February, which revealed that Match Group, an $8 billion company operating in over 190 countries, had long been aware of the extent of harm occurring on its platforms but concealed this information. The investigation found that in January 2023, a banned user could create a new profile on Tinder using the same phone number and photos. Similar testing in December 2025 confirmed that banned users could also sign up again on Hinge, Plenty of Fish, and OkCupid using the same identifying details.
Match Group did not respond to a request for comment. In a February statement provided through former spokesperson Kayla Whaling, the company asserted its commitment to safety, highlighting “harassment-preventing AI tools, ID verification for profiles, and a portal that helps us better support and communicate with law enforcement.” The statement emphasized that “every person deserves safe and respectful experiences” and that the company was “committed to doing the work to make dating safer on our platforms and beyond.”
However, the lawsuit and the dating app Reporting Project’s investigation paint a different picture, suggesting a systemic failure to prioritize user safety. One plaintiff, identified as Alexa, recounted being initially drawn to Matthews’s profile in 2023, describing him as someone who “has it together.” After meeting him and consuming a drink he offered, she said she blacked out and later learned he had been reported to Hinge three years prior.
“Hinge was liable for giving him a platform,” Alexa stated. “They had all the power and the resources to prevent this from happening.”
Legal experts caution that the lawsuit faces significant hurdles due to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that generally shields online platforms from liability for user-generated content. Previous attempts to hold dating apps accountable under similar circumstances have been unsuccessful, as courts have consistently invoked Section 230 protections.
Despite these legal challenges, Match Group is actively touting safety improvements.During a November earnings call, CEO Spencer Rascoff announced the company was “doubling down on trust and safety across our platforms,” citing the integration of tools like video verification, advice algorithms, and AI-assisted moderation. rascoff acknowledged that some of these tools were impacting monthly active users but framed this as a positive trade-off, stating that improving user outcomes with minimal revenue impact was “a good sign.”
However, the company has faced financial headwinds since 2022, with its stock price plummeting to less than a third of its peak. Rascoff, who took the helm in February, implemented a 13% headcount reduction in an effort to revitalize the company.
The case raises critical questions about the obligation of dating app companies to protect their users from harm and the limitations of current legal frameworks in addressing online abuse. Alexa, who no longer uses dating apps, expressed a profound sense of betrayal and a loss of faith in the possibility of safe online connections. “I will never date the same again,” she said. “I’ve kind of even accepted that I would be totally fine being alone for the rest of my life if it means keeping myself safe from what happened to me.”
