Federal Court Finds TikTok Creator Liable for Online Harassment Campaign
Middle District of Florida court holds TikTok creator liable for inciting harassment.
Why it matters: The ruling sets a precedent on social media liability, essential for legal teams managing digital defamation and cyber harassment cases.
- Judge Kyle Dudek ruled that TikTok creator Danesh Noshirvan’s indirect incitement of harassment constitutes tortious conduct.
- Noshirvan reposted a video of Jennifer Couture, prompting his followers to send abusive messages and false reviews to Garramone Plastic Surgery.
- The harassment caused reputational and economic harm, leading to claims of tortious interference and defamation.
- Judge Sheri Polster Chappell described Noshirvan’s use of 'cancel culture' tactics to mobilize online harassment campaigns.
On November 10, 2026, U.S. District Judge Kyle Dudek of the Middle District of Florida ruled in Couture v. Noshirvan that TikTok influencer Danesh Noshirvan is liable for indirect incitement of online harassment. The court found that by reposting a video of Jennifer Couture, Noshirvan prompted his followers to flood Garramone Plastic Surgery with hundreds of abusive messages and false negative reviews, resulting in significant reputational and economic harm.
The ruling, linked here, determined that such conduct counts as tortious interference and defamation under Florida law. Importantly, Judge Dudek emphasized that direct statements are not required to hold a party liable; merely encouraging or inciting harassment online suffices.
Judge Sheri Polster Chappell, commenting on related proceedings, characterized Noshirvan’s approach as a 'cancel culture' tactic—leveraging social media to target individuals or businesses with coordinated harassment campaigns. This commentary was reported by the Tampa Bay Times, providing an independent corroboration of the court's observations.
This decision breaks new ground by addressing how courts may hold social media influencers accountable for their role in mobilizing online harassment. Legal professionals advising clients in digital defamation, cyber torts, and social media risk management should take note of this precedent, especially as similar campaigns become more common.
Note: Tampa Bay Times report explains Judge Chappell’s perspective on the case's broader cultural implications.
By the numbers:
- Hundreds of abusive messages sent—following Noshirvan's repost of video
- False negative reviews—targeting Garramone Plastic Surgery
- November 10, 2026—date of the federal court ruling
Yes, but: While the ruling is a significant step toward regulating social media incitement, legal standards for indirect liability remain evolving and may vary by jurisdiction.
What's next: Legal experts expect more litigation to clarify responsibilities of influencers in online harassment; watch for potential appeals or higher court rulings on similar cases.