A lawsuit filed by more victims of the sex trafficking operation claims that Pornhub’s moderation staff ignored reports of their abuse videos.
Sixty-one additional women are suing Pornhub’s parent company, claiming that the company failed to take down videos of their abuse as part of the sex trafficking operation Girls Do Porn. They’re suing the company and its sites for sex trafficking, racketeering, conspiracy to commit racketeering, and human trafficking.
The complaint, filed on Tuesday, includes what it claims are internal emails obtained by the plaintiffs, represented by Holm Law Group, between Pornhub moderation staff. The emails allegedly show that Pornhub had only one moderator to review 700,000 potentially abusive videos, and that the company intentionally ignored repeated reports from victims in those videos.
The damages and restitution they seek amounts to more than $311,100,000. They demand a jury trial, and seek damages of $5 million per plaintiff, as well as restitution for all the money Aylo, the new name for Pornhub’s parent company, earned “marketing, selling and exploiting Plaintiffs’ videos in an amount that exceeds one hundred thousand dollars for each plaintiff.”
The plaintiffs are 61 more unnamed “Jane Doe” victims of Girls Do Porn, adding to the 60 that sued Pornhub in 2020 for similar claims.
Girls Do Porn was a federally-convicted sex trafficking ring that coerced young women into filming pornographic videos under the pretense of “modeling” gigs. In some cases, the women were violently abused. The operators told them that the videos would never appear online, so that their home communities wouldn’t find out, but they uploaded the footage to sites like Pornhub, where the videos went viral—and in many instances, destroyed their lives. Girls Do Porn was an official Pornhub content partner, with its videos frequently appearing on the front page, where they gathered millions of views.
read more: https://www.404media.co/girls-do-porn-victims-sue-pornhub-for-300-million/
Taking jobs from people and replacing them with automation works towards the utopia we want of having to work less so long as the labor is directly to benefit the people and not the ruling class
There's a hell lot riding on that caveat. Personally I'm not as hopeful in that regard.
We can make it so the labor benefits the workers. I'm just saying it's not inherently a bad thing to replace jobs with automation, like many default to
That's the ideal but you know that's not how it works at all in our current society. Replacing workers with automation just leads to workers needing to find a new job.
Businesses replacing them yes obviously but that's not what I'm referring to. We shouldn't assume automation or loss of jobs are inherently bad, we should strive for worker-benefited automation. Many people don't even consider it at all but it directly opposes capitalistic systems in a very meaningful way
I know what you mean. You're talking about an ideal reality. In the real world, people get fucked over when they're fired, and ai will put a lot of people out of work. Before we can get near what you're talking about we need widespread labor movements to ensure worker's rights and to fight for worker-benefited automation among other things. It doesn't look like we're close to being there yet, unfortunately. I just don't see how you can say that automation putting people out of work is moving towards that goal. It just fucks people over because workers have no protection.