The rights of users in cyberspace are always violated and the legislators are obliged to create legal requirements to protect them against speculations. Although businessmen have access to legislation and prevent the protection of citizens, but Section 230 of the American Civility Act of 1996 is the main obstacle to curbing the arbitrariness of large platforms such as Google, Twitter, Instagram, etc. In contrast, the experience of legislation in the European Union to control platforms has had some successes despite the existence of shortcomings, but on the other hand, in Iran, the legislation in this area has been very weak and contrary to global experiences. The main question here is what model of legislation regarding the rights of platform users can be effective in Iran? This article presents the answer to this question with a comparative approach to the two legislative systems of the United States of America and the European Union, with a descriptive and analytical method. The findings of the research show that, contrary to the experiences of other countries, the legislation in Iran both in order to support the development of domestic platforms in compliance with the principles of competition and in order to protect the rights of platform users with problems such as the confusion of policy and regulation and self-regulation, intensifying the challenge of the legislator, the instability of the economic regulations of activists The virtual economy and the lack of specification of users' rights have led to damages in this field.