A sexual abuse victim has sued Visa for her videos posted on porn platform Pornhub after a US court ruled against the payments company.
Serena Fleets was 13 in 2014 when she alleged, a boyfriend pressured her to make an explicit video, which she later posted on Pornhub.
Flights alleges that Visa conspired with Pornhub’s parent company, MindGeek, in processing advertising revenue to make money from videos of its abuse.
Was asked to remove from the visa case.
Fleits’ story was featured in a New York Times article “The Kids of Pornhub” after publication that MindGeek removed millions of videos and made significant changes to its policies and practices.
The victim’s allegations are summarized in a pre-trial decision by the Central District Court of California.
million views
The initial porn video posted on Pornhub without the victim’s knowledge or consent was viewed 400,000 times when the victim searched it.
She alleged that upon learning of the video, she contacted MindGeek as her mother “to inform her that the video qualifies as child pornography.” It was removed a few weeks later.
But users who had downloaded the video re-uploaded it multiple times, and one of them garnered 2.7 million views, they argue.
The complainant alleges that MindGeek generated advertising revenue from these reposts.
Fleits says that her life “got out of control” (she had several unsuccessful suicide attempts and her family relationships deteriorated) and then, while at a friend’s house, an older man introduced her to heroin.
To finance his addiction, while still a minor, he made more explicit videos at the behest of this man, some of which were uploaded to Pornhub.
The report states, “While MindGeek benefited from child pornography submitted to plaintiffs, plaintiffs were intermittently homeless or living in their car, addicted to heroin, depressed, suicidal and Was without family support.” Judge Cormack J. Brief description of Carney.
MindGeek told the BBC that in this case, the court has not yet ruled on the veracity of the allegations and must conclude that all of the plaintiffs’ allegations are true and accurate.
“When the court can actually consider the facts, we are confident that the plaintiffs’ claims will be dismissed for lack of merit,” the company said.
“tools for committing crimes”
The judge ruled that, at the current stage of the proceedings, “the Court can infer the strong possibility that the Visa network was involved in at least some advertising transaction directly related to the plaintiff’s video.”
But the payments company argued that “the allegation that Visa recognized MindGeek as an authorized merchant and processed payments on its websites did not suggest that Visa had agreed to engage in any form of sex trafficking.”
He also argued, according to the judge’s account, that a business relationship alone does not establish a conspiracy.
But Judge Carney said that, at this stage of the proceedings, “the court can comfortably deduce that Visa’s intent is to help MindGeek monetize child pornography, from the fact that Visa has given MindGeek the means to do so.” continued to provide and knew MindGeek was doing it.”
“Put another way, Visa is not accused of merely creating an incentive to commit a crime, it is an allegation that it knowingly provided a device used to commit a crime,” he explained.
A Visa spokesperson told the BBC that the company condemns sex trafficking, sexual abuse and child sexual abuse material.
He said, “This pre-trial decision is disappointing and misrepresents Visa’s role and its policies and practices. Visa will not tolerate the use of our network for illegal activity. is an unfair defendant.”
zero stamina
MindGeek’s CEO and COO resigned last month.
The senior executive departure followed more negative press in an article in The New Yorker magazine which, among other things, examined the company’s restraint policies.
MindGeek told the BBC that:
- Has zero tolerance for posting illegal content on its platforms;
- Post banned from anyone who has not presented a government-issued ID that passes third-party verification;
- Removed the ability to download free content;
- Integrated various technology platforms and content moderation tools;
- Establish fingerprinting of all videos that violate non-consensual content and child sexual abuse content policies to prevent the deleted video from being reposted;
- Expanded its workforce and moderation processes.
The company also said that any suggestion that it is not serious about removing illegal content is “clearly untrue.”
