In the 2000s, online platforms arrived on the French economic scene without any real legal framework. Only a few general provisions, such as the 2000 e-Commerce Directive and the 2004 Law on Confidence in the Digital Economy (LCEN), provided a common legal basis for all players in the sector. In the absence of specific rules, the regime applicable to so-called rating platforms, such as Glassdoor, was gradually developed in the courts. This legal battle has been fought in France for more than 10 years by Elsa Rodrigues, a partner in the business litigation department of the law firm Lerins and an expert on platform-related issues, alongside Annie Khalid, General Counsel at Glassdoor. Joint interview.
Décideurs. Can you explain what was the first significant court battle fought by Glassdoor in France ?
Annie Khalid. Our first strategic challenge concerned the legal classification of Glassdoor’s role when content is published on its platform, seeking recognition of its role as a content host rather than a publisher. This point is crucial because a platform classified as a host can only be held liable when manifestly unlawful content has been brought to its attention—through a flag, for example—and has not been promptly removed by the platform. This is known as limited liability. Conversely, when a platform is classified as a publisher, it is liable for any unlawful content published on the platform, without the need to bring said content to its attention. The publisher is expected to exercise a priori control over content.
Elsa Rodrigues. The recognition of Glassdoor’s role as a content host in its capacity as an online rating and review platform was first recognized on November 4, 2020, by the Paris Civil Court[1] and has since been confirmed on several occasions, most recently by the Paris Civil Court on March 8, 2024[2] and by the Paris Court of Appeal on May 7, 2025[3] . In practical terms, this means that Glassdoor is only required to intervene to temporarily or permanently remove a review when manifestly unlawful content is reported to it, with no prior obligation to actively monitor content.
“We have successfully fought to defend freedom of expression and the confidentiality of the platform contributor’s identification data in legal proceedings brought against Glassdoor.” Elsa Rodrigues, partner at Lerins
Some companies may have felt that content they considered problematic remained online despite being flagged. This raises the issue of freedom of expression for content authors, and in this case, employees. Can you tell us more about this?
Annie Khalid. We have indeed fought vigorously to demonstrate that unpleasant and critical opinions about a company or its management, when they do not exceed the boundaries of freedom of expression and do not constitute defamation, have a place on the platform. These reviews not only preserve employees’ freedom of expression, but also provide a sincere insight into working conditions and corporate culture. They also highlight areas for improvement that companies need to work on in order to retain their employees. In short, these reviews help to improve the labor market by helping candidates make informed choices.
Elsa Rodrigues. In a recent case, decided on May 7, 2025, by the Paris Court of Appeal[4] , the key issue was to demonstrate that a review in which a former employee expresses himself in measured terms about his professional experience in a company has a place on Glassdoor. The Paris Court of Appeal was convinced, ruling that ‘the comment constituted free criticism and the subjective expression of an opinion or feeling by a former employee who was clearly disappointed with his experience at the company’ and therefore refused to order its removal. This ruling clarifies the boundaries of what is acceptable to write on a rating platform such as Glassdoor, ensuring that a balance is struck between contributors’ freedom of expression and companies’ rights. To date, Glassdoor has never been ordered to remove an online review in France.
In addition to protecting contributors’ freedom of expression, there is also the issue of protecting their anonymity. For several years now, companies have been taking court action to lift the anonymity of content authors by attempting to obtain their identification data.
Elsa Rodrigues. Glassdoor takes the protection of content authors’ anonymity very seriously. This is particularly important given the nature of the company’s activity, as no employee will exercise their freedom of expression to voice criticism if they risk being identified by their employer. Before the GDPR came into force, judges would order the disclosure of contributors’ personal data, sometimes without conducting a thorough examination of the request. At that time, we defended the confidentiality of identification data in court proceedings brought against Glassdoor by weighing up the interests at stake. Since the adoption of the GDPR and the new provisions of the LCEN[5], the conditions for their disclosure are strictly regulated. As identification data is considered personal data, its disclosure is only possible when it is strictly necessary, justified, and proportionate, and is therefore now restricted to limited cases, namely for the purposes of criminal proceedings, the prevention of threats to public safety, and the safeguarding of national security[6]. The disclosure of technical data, such as IP addresses, is strictly limited to the needs of the struggle against crime and serious delinquency. This allows these data to be given a high level of protection while ensuring control in the most serious cases. Ultimately, Glassdoor has never been ordered to disclose data in France, with the exception of a decision handed down in 2016 in a very specific context, as the company was not represented at the hearing.
Annie Khalid. Over the past eight years, we have faced numerous proceedings in France seeking to obtain the identification data of some of our contributors. However, Glassdoor has won all of its battles, both before the Paris Civil Court, the Economic Activities Court, and the Paris Court of Appeal. These successive legal victories, won with Elsa Rodrigues and her team at the Lerins law firm, including Justine Massard and Carla Moussay, confirm that Glassdoor is a responsible platform that guarantees its contributors’ freedom of expression and respects their fundamental rights. They are part of the fight that Glassdoor has been waging since it’s the beginning: to provide employees with a protected space for expression in order to improve the labor market.
