Texas says Facebook can be held liable for sex trafficking

 Karen Townsend:

The Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday that Facebook can be held liable for sex traffickers who use the social media platform to recruit and prey on children. The court ruled in favor of three Houston civil actions involving teenage sex trafficking victims. All three victims said they met their traffickers through Facebook’s messaging functions.

The women are now adults who say that they were recruited as teenagers through Facebook apps and trafficked for sex. They say that Facebook gave credibility to the traffickers and provided “a point of first contact between sex traffickers and these children” and “an unrestricted platform to stalk, exploit, recruit, groom, and extort children into the sex trade.” The young women sued Facebook for negligence and product liability. They claim that Facebook failed to warn them about sex trafficking or try to prevent it on their platform. They also claim that Facebook benefited from the sexual exploitation of the trafficking victims.

The Texas Supreme Court ruled that Facebook is not a “lawless no-man’s-land”. The justices ruled the lawsuits can go forward against Facebook for violating a provision of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code passed in 2009. Facebook lawyers argue that it is not liable. Facebook says it is shielded by Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act. Section 230 states that what users say and write online is not the same as the publisher sending the same message. Facebook claims immunity from these lawsuits. The Texas Supreme Court ruled against that claim of immunity.
...

I am not a big fan of the Messenger App on Facebook.  I do occasionally use it as a text message to family members.  I am pretty sure I have never seen any sex trafficking on the app.  I do find it ironic that in defending the case the company which irrationally bans President Trump appears to be saying that sex trafficking does not breach their community standards.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more