Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 141 posts

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#61

Post by 3fe9a03ccd14ca5 »

ajmurmann wrote: post #53

> In November 2015 60 emails and phone calls called for her to be expelled. The emails went to the dean of the law school, and to the head of the student body with links to the video. What kind of evil person does this? Is there anything these monsters can be prosecuted for? At least the people who made the movies had a motive in greed. The people who sent these emails wouldn't even gain anything. They are clearly no…

That part made me sick to my stomach. I’m glad these women received some financial redress, but there’s nothing that will make up for their experience.

Before the internet people had so much more room to make mistakes. It’s a tough time for young people to slip up.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#62

Post by AchieveLife »

wmeredith wrote: post #40
randyrand wrote: post #3

was it hidden in the contract? just curious the extent of the lying.

The contracts were copy/paste boilerplate bullshit. The women were told the recordings were for wealthy private collectors and would never be widely released. The women were often flown to other states, plied with alcohol, and then told they would only be flown home if they co-operated. These guys are barely a notch above kidnappers, rapists, and sex traffickers. The stories have been around online for a while, but n…

From the article

"launched in 2006 by New Zealander Michael Pratt and operated by Ruben Garcia and Matthew Wolfe. Filmed in homes, hotels and trailer parks"

"During the course of the civil trial, Pratt, Garcia and Wolfe were criminally indicted for sex trafficking, among other charges. Garcia and Wolfe are currently in federal custody. Pratt is a fugitive."

Disgusting criminal, manipulative behavior that harmed a lot of people.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#63

Post by ggm »

celticmusic wrote: post #50
TomMckenny wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are saying that we should treat the accused as just that: innocent until proven guilty. Which is a very good policy. Especially since this industry sees a lot of attacks on the grounds of of "immorality" But in this case we have moved beyond merely accused. We have a completed verdict in a real trail. And although the judicial system has flaws, in this case the weaker parties actually won against the more…

that's my take on it too. I didn't fully read through all the details, but I have to believe that courts did their due diligence and the women were legitimately coerced by the website. And I've just realized that 'legitimately coerced' out of context sounds like an oxymoron.

demonstrably coerced

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#64

Post by strathmeyer »

mysterydip wrote: post #22

(no disrespect intended to the victims in this story when I say this) This is a cautionary tale in the world we live in today: Once something is recorded, it could be anywhere. Even without willful intent on the part of the owner, phones get lost or stolen, old hardware gets sold on ebay, cloud accounts get compromised, etc. Have fun, but be careful.

What makes you identify more with the kidnappers, rapists, and sex traffickers than the victims?

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#65

Post by wilsonfiifi »

mysterydip wrote: post #56
erikpukinskis wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does indeed come off as disrespectful. These videos weren’t “leaked”, they weren’t found on someone’s old phone. The people who shot the video LIED to the participants in order to coerce participation. They paid other people to lie to them as well in order to create a more complete deception. Then they posted the videos in exactly the way they said they would not do. They also provided drugs and alcohol to the p…

My comments were not about the people in this story directly. I am certainly not blaming them for what happened. My point is, if you don't control the source of the recording (whatever it may be), you can't control what happens to it. With how easy it is to share any data these days, it could go places you don't want it to very quickly. "Have fun" was a general comment for people. Look at all the political fallout th…

Honestly, I don’t think you need to defend your comment any further to appease anyone who would be potentially offended by reading it. “Do not knowingly film your sexual encounter(s)” period. It’s a general cautionary statement and should be treated as such.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#66

Post by manquer »

sysbin wrote: post #30

Each woman was seeking 2 million from what I've found online. The judgement ended up being a payout of 12.7m sum and that's for splitting between 22 victims with their representation. I wonder how much each person walked away with after their attorneys were paid. I've not witnessed justice in my life but I like to think they will be happy with the judgement even though it's a lot lower than they sought.

No amount of money is going to help them deal with trauma and problems they are facing everyday. I see this more as punitive damage than actual compensation for the harm the company did

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#67

Post by avh02 »

fenwick67 wrote: post #52
wruza wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We discuss porn industry and porn site’s implementation and ux details at work, both men and women. It’s 2020. Do you know I breathe air and eat food?

Please don't talk about porn at work. Sincerely - anybody who has a shred of professionalism

And when part of your team's responsibility is fighting to keep pornography off your website? Snicker like a child when it inevitably comes up and go "so unprofessional!"? Or act like an adult?

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#68

Post by narnianal »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #42
mysterydip wrote: post #22

(no disrespect intended to the victims in this story when I say this) This is a cautionary tale in the world we live in today: Once something is recorded, it could be anywhere. Even without willful intent on the part of the owner, phones get lost or stolen, old hardware gets sold on ebay, cloud accounts get compromised, etc. Have fun, but be careful.

This does indeed come off as disrespectful. These videos weren’t “leaked”, they weren’t found on someone’s old phone. The people who shot the video LIED to the participants in order to coerce participation. They paid other people to lie to them as well in order to create a more complete deception. Then they posted the videos in exactly the way they said they would not do. They also provided drugs and alcohol to the p…

The best way to avoid fraud is to become smarter oneself. It is not that hard to detect once you learned some survival skills. Sorry, but criticising someone as disrespectful for helping people to learn survival skills sounds damaging. A little like not telling your children about sex and condoms because you don't want them to have sex.

Shit will happen. Better be prepared, and better help others prepare. Stop criticizing people who try to help.

PS: He also didn't say that it isn't fraud. He said that besides fraud there are a lot of other ways a video you made could be used in other ways than you intended.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#69

Post by SkyMarshal »

This whole thing is idiotic. The lying producers are assholes. The women are idiots for trusting anything told to them in this context by complete strangers motivated only by money. In the words of Shakespeare, "all are punished".

>“These are millennial women who grew up with the internet – they knew the consequences of pornographic videos ending up online which is why they asked where the videos were going before they were lied to."

I'm not sure they did, really. That last sentence should end with "knew the consequences of pornographic videos ending up online which is why they wisely chose not to risk doing porn." Maybe college should teach mandatory classes on risk management.

>Her life, she says, is irrevocably changed, and her hopes of a legal career have been ended.

“I do not want a career as an attorney. My name is completely destroyed.”

I hope somebody explains to her this isn't necessarily true. There are places and firms in the country more sex-positive and/or forgiving where this won't destroy her life and she can still be an attorney. She also pretty much has a ready made career as an attorney focusing on sex-trafficking and similar fields.

Re: Porn site to pay $12.7M to women who didn't know videos would be posted

#70

Post by buildzr »

strathmeyer wrote: post #64
mysterydip wrote: post #22

(no disrespect intended to the victims in this story when I say this) This is a cautionary tale in the world we live in today: Once something is recorded, it could be anywhere. Even without willful intent on the part of the owner, phones get lost or stolen, old hardware gets sold on ebay, cloud accounts get compromised, etc. Have fun, but be careful.

What makes you identify more with the kidnappers, rapists, and sex traffickers than the victims?

This effect is - in some ways I fear, almost inherent to tech.

The same reason you call someone an idiot if they click an ad that looks like an error message, login to their bank on mybank.com.sketchysite.info, respond to a Nigerian scam or open that .pdf.scr file attached to an email. This stuff seems dead flat basic to people who are exposed to scams regularly. We don't call the scammers idiots for making millions on ransomware, most of us just delete their messages without a second thought - instead we call their victims idiots for falling for it in ways that seem obvious to us. Heck, even in much of the general public these are used as punchlines on occasion. Victim blaming and just expecting people to recognize these things as sketchy seems to be quite common for these sorts of technical issues.

Post reply on HN