U.S. Senators: Change Internet laws to hold Backpage liable for sex trafficking

[Libertine]

U.S. Senators: Want to change Internet laws to hold Backpage liable for sex trafficking


A bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced legislation Tuesday that aims to make it easier to sue and criminally prosecute operators of online classified sites like Backpage.com that have been used to advertise sex workers.

The proposed bill would amend the Communications Decency Act to eliminate a provision that shields operators of websites from being liable for content posted by third-party users.

In addition to removing liability protections for websites that facilitate “unlawful sex acts with sex trafficking victims,” lawmakers are seeking to amend the CDA to allow state prosecutors — not just federal law enforcement — to take action against individuals and businesses that use websites to violate federal sex trafficking laws.

"For too long, courts around the country have ruled that Backpage can continue to facilitate illegal sex trafficking online with no repercussions," said Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio. "The Communications Decency Act is a well-intentioned law, but it was never intended to help protect sex traffickers who prey on the most innocent and vulnerable among us. This bipartisan, narrowly crafted bill will help protect vulnerable women and young girls from these horrific crimes.”

The legislative push marks the latest effort by federal lawmakers to go after Backpage, the controversial website that the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children says accounts for 73% of child sex trafficking reports in the U.S.

Law enforcement and anti-trafficking advocates have long sought to hold the operators of Backpage responsible through civil lawsuits, charging that operators have knowingly facilitated sex trafficking by providing a cloak of anonymity for pimps and making it easy for johns to use the site to arrange meetings with prostitutes.

Lawmakers have been ratcheting up the pressure against the Dutch-owned, Texas-headquartered company over the last several months.

Last week, Portman and Sens. Tom Carper, D-Del., and Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., announced they formally recommended the Justice Department launch a criminal investigation of Backpage.

In addition to Portman and McCaskill, who launched the two-year-long Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations probe into Backpage's business, 13 Republicans and five Democrats announced their support of the bill to alter the CDA.

"Until our investigation showed Backpage was actively facilitating sex trafficking, the company had repeatedly used the federal law that protects online platforms to escape accountability for the disgusting crimes it aided," McCaskill said in a statement. "But even as we’ve helped deny Backpage its legal shield in these cases, we need a broader effort to stop the next Backpage, before it starts."


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ing/528493001/

[rocketrick]

This legislation sounds like it would hold the website hosting an ad placed by someone else that leads to a transaction that is deemed trafficking liable for the content of the ad.

Could that be extended to this review site. Does the fact that our reviews may lead to a similar transaction make this site and others like it make these sites liable. Or is the fact that this and other sites do not profit from those potential transactions protect these sites?

I don't know. I'm not a lawyer.

[Redfish]

Maybe the motel and hotel chain lobbyists will help kill this bill LOL. There is a obviously a lot of political influence in the Asian communities who also invested large sums of money in houses and apartments in the SGV for us hobbyists, and I have invested a considerable sum in their support. I guess the last line of defense will be WeChat and similar apps that are controlled by foreign countries (i.e., China). Will this bill block those apps in the US? I rarely book a girl from BP or CitiVibe. I usually can find them off-the-grid or on **, get their text number, and I’m good. Will this bill enable the FEDS to monitor my phone apps? This scenario is a very slippery slope, indeed. It’s called “The Oldest Profession” for a reason. It’s not going away. Ever. I have never met a girl who is not doing the deed on her own accord. Of course, there is trafficking by evil people who profit from making girls do something they don’t want to do. The FEDS should focus on those evil people and leave us the fuck alone.

[Libertine]

Don’t let its name fool you: the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA) wouldn’t help punish sex traffickers. What it would do is expose the Internet content platforms that we all rely on every day to the risk of overwhelming criminal and civil liability for their customers’ actions.

Under current law, an intermediary (like a social media platform or a message board) can’t be held legally responsible for the content created by its users for purposes of enforcing certain laws affecting speech online.

SESTA would extend more criminal and civil liability for sex trafficking to content platforms, thus making opening or running such a platform an extremely dangerous venture.

There’s a bill in the Senate and a bill in the House.

As your constituent, I am writing to urge you to oppose both the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (S. 1693) and the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (H.R. 1865). These bills would be disastrous for freedom of speech and expression online as well as for innovation among online businesses.

These bills weaken 47 U.S.C. 230, one of the most important laws protecting free expression online. Section 230 has contributed directly to the rise of Internet-based services by giving them some assurance that they won’t be exposed to massive criminal and civil liability for their customers’ activities.

Please oppose S. 1693, H.R. 1865, and any future attempts in Congress to weaken protections for online speech under Section 230.

you can sign your opposition here:

https://act.eff.org/action/don-t-let...r-the-internet



you can read the Senate proposed bill here:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...nate-bill/1693

[WetWillie]

Making a social media site responsible for censoring content isn't going to fly with Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. I can't imagine they'd let this go past committee.

DOJ is going to be in an interesting position soon as sex trafficking charges against Trump are about to come out of the state of New York. Will that make them look the other way, or ratchet up the self-righteousness?

[Sir Lynx A Lot]

Law enforcement always want things handed to them on a silver platter. Often times, that could only happen is someone's constitutional right were violated whether it be by snooping, wiretapping, confidential informants (rats), or going back-ass backwards about something that will end up morphing into something else, in order to survive.

They are singling out Backpage, it seems, because of some personal grudge between some hot shot cop/federal agent and the owners operators of the website. But they will have to draw a fine line to be able to shut BP down all while plenty of other sites are strictly dedicated to the sex trade remain up and running. So how much of an impact could they have on the sex trafficking "problem" that we have? Very little, if any.

You know they are desperate for something to hold on to when they start spouting nonsensical drivel like this:

Originally Posted by USA Today

"For too long, courts around the country have ruled that Backpage can continue to facilitate illegal sex trafficking online with no repercussions," said Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio.

I cannot imagine one single judge in any one court across this entire continent who would go on record to suggest that any entity can "continue to facilitate a federal crime with no repercussions"...

And of course, lets cite some random statistic because that wil always make people cringe... So they offer something like this:

Originally Posted by USA Today

The legislative push marks the latest effort by federal lawmakers to go after Backpage, the controversial website that the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children says accounts for 73% of child sex trafficking reports in the U.S.

To be able to establish such an odd number as 73%, they must have some hard facts not only to attribute that 73% of sex trafficking to BP, but they must have information linking those 73% of sex traffickers to ads that are on BP. But this would also imply that they have some direct links to information about , how, when, where these sex traffickers are operating and who they are.

Yet rather than going after the real criminals that are the basis for their (fake) statistic, instead of busting down doors to help save these "exploited children", they are going after a website that allows the general public to advertise products and services!

[MPkid]

Originally Posted by Sir Lynx A Lot

Law enforcement always want things handed to them on a silver platter. Often times, that could only happen is someone's constitutional right were violated whether it be by snooping, wiretapping, confidential informants (rats), or going back-ass backwards about something that will end up morphing into something else, in order to survive.

They are singling out Backpage, it seems, because of some personal grudge between some hot shot cop/federal agent and the owners operators of the website. But they will have to draw a fine line to be able to shut BP down all while plenty of other sites are strictly dedicated to the sex trade remain up and running. So how much of an impact could they have on the sex trafficking "problem" that we have? Very little, if any.

You know they are desperate for something to hold on to when they start spouting nonsensical drivel like this:



I cannot imagine one single judge in any one court across this entire continent who would go on record to suggest that any entity can "continue to facilitate a federal crime with no repercussions"...

And of course, lets cite some random statistic because that wil always make people cringe... So they offer something like this:



To be able to establish such an odd number as 73%, they must have some hard facts not only to attribute that 73% of sex trafficking to BP, but they must have information linking those 73% of sex traffickers to ads that are on BP. But this would also imply that they have some direct links to information about , how, when, where these sex traffickers are operating and who they are.

Yet rather than going after the real criminals that are the basis for their (fake) statistic, instead of busting down doors to help save these "exploited children", they are going after a website that allows the general public to advertise products and services!

I would say it's more like 73% of US Govt officials are involved in sex trafficking of children all the way up to and including many past presidents. This documentary was just the tip of the iceberg and they went to great lengths to keep it covered up including killing the lawyer representing the kids involved and throwing one little girl in jail for 30 years for perjury for refusing to change her testimony...which ALL of the other kids did when they saw what was happening to their friends and lawyer!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDIrG3Lkmt0