111–120 of 141 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They see something they disapprove of, it goes against their values. So they spread awareness of what happened.
With little or no thought or concern for what happens next.
> 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…
Can you be more specific on why you think the people who sent emails are "evil" and deserve to be judged? And I'm talking about moral aspect here, not legal. > They are clearly nothing but malicious, bigoted and evil. Try to look at it this way. Jane Doe lived in a society (family, coworkers, friends) where she was respected and was considered to be good, ethical and honourable person. At the same time she wanted to…
Why is it in society's interest (or rather someone's twisted representation of society) that Jane be reported? Has she killed/harmed anyone or did any damage?
> If she's a teacher, her students parents may not want a porn actor to teach their children
And some people (still) don't want to interact people of certain ethnicity, religion, disability, etc. Thankfully we have realised the stupidity of this and have laws to deal with it.
Also, if she's working, shouldn't she be judged by her performance at work, and not what happens outside?
> Her parents may be traditionalists
So what? How does this give them the right to know what's going on, and why do you consider it to be someone's moral duty to disclose it?
> So why shouldn't the person email Jane's friends and parents and tell them that she's lying to them?
Because she's lying to harm anyone or gain anything from it; nobody is getting hurt by the lie. She's "lying" because society still attaches some stupid stigma around pornography and she doesn't want the fallout on her career/relationships when people like you catch wind of this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can recognize the face of someone you met randomly from an ocean of porn online, I think it’s safe to say that person watches more frequently than once-a-anything.
These weren't randomly recognised: their contact details were published on another site, and the sociopaths who visit those sites then contacted their families, employers etc.
The context of the quote was not as you describe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's terrible, I hope you two have been able to heal. I'd suggest trying to contact the lawyers for the plaintiffs to see if your wife has a case as well. This article [1] mentions that this is the lead lawyer: https://sanfordheisler.com/team/ed-chapin/ [1] https://www.law.com/therecorder/2020/01/02/girlsdoporn-faces...
We moved to a new area and just tried to move on. Honestly I feel bad for not pursuing it more aggressively. This post has rekindled my desire to go after the bastard that tricked her. Thanks for sharing the links.
My wife fell victim to this before we met. I'm curious how we'd go about filing a case against the website. I send a message to the FBI a few years ago and never heard anything.
Battling Against Demeaning and Abusive Selfie Sharing (BADASS) has a lot of experience helping people get the content legally taken down from hosting sites. https://badassarmy.org
> 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…
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.
So, roughly, 4.5MM goes to the attorneys. That leaves 8.2MM split 22 ways.
The woman will likely get somewhere around $375,000 each.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless I missed it, I didn’t see something as plain as “X million in the US watch porn at least 1x a week” or something like that, which is what I’m curious about.
They say "Once again, the United States continues to be the country with the highest daily traffic to Pornhub". The give a graph of top 20 countries, which they say represent an aggregated 80% of their traffic. The US is first, and take around 40-50% of that traffic. Let's go with 40%. Of 80% that's ~ 32% of total. They also say: "Pornhub’s daily visits now exceed 100 million". This means 32% of 100M, so around 32M a…
was it hidden in the contract? just curious the extent of the lying.
"The contracts were filled with “dense and ambiguous language,” including one 140-word paragraph that Enright called “a grammatical labarynth.” The contract covers “photographs, pictures or portraits” and printed material. “It does not, however, mention GirlsDoPorn.com, nor the words ‘internet,’ ‘online,’ or ‘website,’” Enright wrote. “It is thus designed to obscure what will actually be done with the videos and to e…