![]() ![]() Once the women discovered their videos were posted online, the website owners ignored requests to take the videos down and cut contact with the women altogether, Enright ruled. Other women hired as "reference models" allegedly spoke to uneasy victims over the phone and claimed they had been featured in prior videos without issue, falsely assuring victims that their videos would not end up on the internet. Several of the women alleged they were lured to San Diego with online advertisements that made no mention of nudity or pornography, much less the GirlsDoPorn business name.Įnright ruled the defendants pressured the women to sign documents replete with "broad, vague releases couched in disorganized, complicated legalese," which obscured the victims' concerns over potential online dissemination. The women alleged they were coerced to film pornographic videos or led to believe their videos would only be distributed to private owners, rather than proliferated online on GirlsDoPorn's subscription website, as well as numerous free sites, many of which are owned by MindGeek. The site's owners were also sued in San Diego Superior Court by 22 women, who were awarded nearly $13 million by San Diego Superior Court Judge Kevin Enright. ![]() 2024 California law to protect most workers using cannabis on own time ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |