Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseyrave:

Case filing - https://files.catbox.moe/osc54x.pdf

From pay-walled law website:

Law360 (March 1, 2022, 8:05 PM EST) -- A proposed class has urged the Ninth Circuit to revive its case against Reddit that alleges Section 230 liability protections do not shield the company from allegations of profiting off child pornography, saying a district judge erred in tossing the case.

The proposed class — composed of people identified only as Jane and John Does — said in its opening appellate brief that U.S. District Judge James V. Selna was wrong to dismiss the suit and misinterpreted Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which generally protects websites from being sued over content posted by their users or third parties.

"This case squarely fits under the plain language of Section 1595, a provision of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act," the plaintiffs said. "Plaintiffs' amended complaint alleges in hundreds of detailed allegations that Reddit refuses to prevent, detect and remove known illegal content or ban repeat offenders who traffic in child pornography — all to Reddit's profit."

The plaintiffs added, "For these reasons, Reddit violated Section 1595 by 'knowingly benefit[ting]' from participation in a venture that it knew or 'should have known' was engaged in illegal trafficking."

The complaint filed in April claims Reddit is cognizant that it has become a haven for p-dophiles looking for child porn.

One of the lead plaintiffs is a woman who claims an ex-boyfriend of hers posted videos and pictures of the two having s*x on subreddits. She was 16 years old at the time the videos and images were taken and reported the posts to Reddit, her suit claims. The site was slow to take action against the posts and did not permanently ban her boyfriend, the complaint says.

Reddit was much quicker to act on a copyright violation claim from the plaintiff rather than on a report that the content was illegal, the lawsuit says.

In August, the plaintiffs argued against Reddit's motion to dismiss and said dismissing the case on Section 230 grounds "would 'impair or limit' the enforcement of [Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act's] civil remedy, precisely the opposite of what the statute directs."

Furthermore, the plaintiffs argued that the law's text says they are allowed to seek damages against Reddit under the TVPRA without proving the website is criminally liable.

But Judge Selna disagreed and dismissed the suit with prejudice, holding that Section 230 protects Reddit from the claims.

In their brief, the plaintiffs argued Congress excluded Section1595 civil claims from the CDA where "the conduct" underlying the claim constitutes a s*x-trafficking crime under Section 1591, but the district court effectively held that claims are only excluded when defendant's alleged actions are a crime.

The judge even added a word into the statute that does not exist and fundamentally changed the intent of Congress with the CDA when he held that claims against sites like Reddit can only succeed if the "defendant's" conduct constitutes a violation of 1591, the plaintiffs said while adding that under the TVPRA, Section 1595 authorizes direct claims against alleged perpetrators or "whoever knowingly benefits" from a perpetrator's actions.

The district court "erred in rewriting the statute to hold that a plaintiff must allege that the website itself violated Section 1591," the plaintiffs said. "If Congress had wanted to limit Section 1595 claims against websites to such a narrow circumstance, it would have done so. But that is not the statute it enacted."

The plaintiffs added the district court "compounded its error in holding that a plaintiff must allege that the website had the criminal mens rea of actual knowledge of the trafficking, rather than constructive knowledge ['knew or should have known'], because Section 1595 itself permits liability against beneficiary defendants."

Counsel for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday.

The plaintiffs are represented by Krysta Kauble Pachman, Davida Brook and Halley Josephs of Susman Godfrey LLP, and Steve Cohen and Raphael Janove of Pollock Cohen LLP.

Reddit is represented by Kristin A. Linsley, Michael H. Dore and Theane Evangelis of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP.

The case is Jane Doe v. Reddit Inc., case number 21-56293, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

--Additional reporting by Jonathan Capriel. Editing by Janice Carter Brown.

Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled an attorney's first name. The error has been corrected.

Update: This story has been updated with additional counsel information.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/1469273/reddit-can-t-use-section-230-in-child-porn-suit-9th-circ-told?copied=1

https://old.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/t5wmui/plaintiffs_urge_judge_to_strip_reddit_of_section/

https://old.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/t61zr3/plaintiffs_urge_judge_to_strip_reddit_of_section/

https://old.reddit.com/r/law/comments/t62ad3/plaintiffs_urge_judge_to_strip_reddit_of_section/?

:#marseyrave:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Too bad the lawyer doesn't have the rejection messages for that /r/SexPositiveHomes p-do that talked about molesting his kid. I frickin hate the gigajanny :marseytrain: pedos.


Krayon sexually assaulted his sister. https://i.rdrama.net/images/17118241526738973.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17118241426254768.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17156480765435808.webp

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.