Pornhub settles California lawsuit that included Canadian women - Action News
Home WebMail Tuesday, November 26, 2024, 02:38 AM | Calgary | -14.9°C | Regions Advertise Login | Our platform is in maintenance mode. Some URLs may not be available. |
World

Pornhub settles California lawsuit that included Canadian women

Pornhub and several affiliated companies have settled a lawsuit brought by 50 women who alleged it profited from pornographic videos published without their full consent.

50 women alleged site profited from pornographic videos published without their full consent

A screengrab of a website.
A lawsuit filed in U.S. district court in California alleged that MindGeek, parent company of Pornhub, knew or should have known that one of its commercial partners regularly used fraud and coercion to get women to appear in videos. Those involved have reached a settlement. (The Canadian Press)

Pornhub and several affiliated companies have settled a lawsuit brought by 50 women who alleged it profited from pornographic videos published without their full consent.

Brian Holm, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, confirmed the settlement and said its terms are confidential.

The lawsuit filed last December in U.S. district court in California alleged that MindGeek, parent company of Pornhub, knew or should have known that one of its commercial partners regularly used fraud and coercion to get women to appear in videos.

The lawsuit initially involved 40 women, including three Canadians, but it was later expanded and other businesses connected to MindGeek were added as defendants.

Recruited under false pretences

The original court filing alleged that MindGeek did not end apartnership with GirlsDoPorn until that company's operators werecharged by U.S. authorities in November 2019.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) launched a new public appeal for information, offering a reward ofup to $50,000 US for information leading to the arrest of Michael JamesPratt, one of the owners of GirlsDoPorn.

According to the FBI, three other people involved withGirlsDoPorn have pleaded guilty to sex-trafficking charges. Two more are awaiting trial.

Authorities allege that women were recruited to participate invideos under false pretences and told that pornographic videos wouldnever be posted online or released in the U.S.

Women pressured, paid less than promised

However, the site's operators planned to post the videos on theirwebsite, where viewers could pay to watch, with excerpts appearingon free sites, such as Pornhub, according to admissions made as partof the guilty pleas.

Women were also pressured to participate in sex acts that theydid not want and paid less than they had been promised, one ofGirlsDoPorn's operators, Ruben Andre Garcia, admitted when hepleaded guilty in November.

In June, Garcia was sentenced to 20 years in a U.S. federalprison.

According to the lawsuit, MindGeek and GirlsDoPorn entered into apartnership in 2011. The deal allegedly allowed videos created byGirlsDoPorn to be hosted on MindGeek's sites, such as Pornhub.

$13M in damages against GirlsDoPorn

The lawsuit also claimed that MindGeek-owned websites did notremove videos when requested by the women who appeared in them. Insome of those requests, the womenstated that they werecoerced, the suit alleged.

In January 2020, a California state court awarded 22 women whohad appeared in GirlsDoPorn videos nearly US$13 million in damages.

While MindGeek is legally headquartered in Luxembourg, its main office is in Montreal.

The company confirmed that a settlement had been reached and saidthat the details were confidential.

"MindGeek has zero tolerance for the posting of illegal contenton its platforms, and has instituted a comprehensive, industry-leading trust and safety policy to identify and eradicate any illegal material from its community, the company said in an unsigned statement.

A joint request to dismiss the suit was filed with the court onOct. 15.

MindGeek also faces a class-action lawsuit involving 30 womenthat was filed in another California federal court in June.