Sex

The Future of FOSTA May Be Frivolous Lawsuits 

|

Passed in 2018, the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act—or FOSTA, for short—made it a federal crime to host web content that "promotes" or "facilitates" prostitution.

In the nearly two years since FOSTA became law, neither federal nor state prosecutors have used it. But that doesn't mean it's simply gathering dust. Web companies are now experiencing the first wave of civil lawsuits made possible by the law.

Companies anticipated that FOSTA would be used more broadly than its proponents claimed. After Congress passed the legislation with bipartisan support, the classified-ad platform Craigslist quickly axed its entire personals section, including categories on the site that were essentially used the same way as dating apps.

It was not the only site to begin limiting legal content related to relationships and sex. And even though it acted quickly, Craigslist is now the target of one of the first FOSTA-based civil lawsuit efforts, with plaintiffs in California and Washington state filing suit against the company.

Both cases against Craigslist rely on a "radical theory of liability," wrote University of Notre Dame Law Professor Alex Yelderman in a January blog post. The suits allege that Craigslist's "erotic services section" was known across the U.S. "as a place to easily locate victims"; that Craigslist knew bad actors had used their site; and that this knowledge "amounted to a venture with sex traffickers to efficiently market victims."

The suits do not claim Craigslist had specific knowledge of the plaintiff (Jane Doe), the person who harmed her, or which ads were used for sex trafficking rather than consensual erotic encounters. The suit simply claims that Craigslist had previously been put "on notice of the human sex trafficking" committed through the site, and was thus responsible for any trafficking that happened.

Classified-ad sites—like social media platforms, blog publishers, email newsletter providers, dating apps, and publications with online comments sections—are conduits for third-party, user-generated content. Prior to FOSTA's passage, judges routinely dismissed suits against Craigslist, Backpage, Facebook, and other web hosts accused of sex trafficking, since a federal law on the books bars civil cases and state charges merely for being conduits of third-party speech. But FOSTA changed the rules for speech that concerns sex, opening the floodgates to individual lawsuits against web hosts such as Craigslist. And because the definition of "sex trafficking" can be so blurry and the crime so hard to prove, the broad language in the law leaves a lot of room for lawyers to treat FOSTA like a get-rich-quick-off-Big-Tech scheme.

Another case in federal court this year targets Mailchimp, an email automation and marketing service. Anyone can sign up for an account and use Mailchimp tools to create and send mass emails. One company that did so was YesBackpage, an adult-advertising platform launched after U.S. authorities shut down Backpage, a website that allowed adult services ads.

Plaintiff lawyers in the Mailchimp case say that by letting YesBackpage use its software, Mailchimp was complicit in, and thus financially liable for, any crimes brokered through YesBackpage's user-generated content. "Mailchimp's marketing relationship with YesBackpage makes it responsible for its natural consequences—the sex trafficking of Jane Doe," the suit states.

"This view of 'natural consequences' is breathtaking," Yelderman wrote. "When sex trafficking is somehow construed as the 'natural consequence' of virtually any action, virtually no person or entity is safe from the threat of liability."

Techdirt editor Mike Masnick has also pointed out that "the claims against Mailchimp are absolutely the kinds of things we all warned would happen when FOSTA was being debated."

But FOSTA supporters insisted innocent companies would have nothing to worry about.

In 2018, when the first lawsuit challenging FOSTA's constitutionality arrived in federal court, Justice Department lawyers argued that it didn't apply to people like masseuse Eric Koszyk, who advertised on Craigslist, and sex worker activist Alex Andrews. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed and tossed the case, writing that FOSTA was "plainly calculated to ensnare only specific unlawful acts with respect to a particular individual, not the broad subject-matter of prostitution."

The plaintiffs appealed, and in January the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals granted Koszyk and Andrews standing to continue the challenge. Hopefully, they can fight their way to a decision that will undermine FOSTA before FOSTA further undermines free speech on the web.

NEXT: From the Archives: May 2020

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. And sadly, the future of Unreason includes the birdbrain Brown. Senior Editor? My, my.

    1. If I reinterpreted her article correctly through her TDS; Mailchimp is suing a woman for allowing herself to be trafficked by Yesbackpage and Yesbackpage told all of its users to drink bleach to avoid contracting the coronavirus.

      1. Change Your Life Right Now! Work From Comfort Of Your Home And Receive Your First Paycheck Within A Week. dxc.No Experience Needed, No Boss Over Your Shoulder… Say Goodbye To Your Old Job! Limited Number Of Spots Open…
        Find out how HERE……More here

    2. Do you have anything to say about the article? You know, the one you are actually commenting on? Wait, I forgot, defending Our Glorious Leader from any possible criticism, anywhere it may arise, is the highest duty of loyal Americans.

  2. Companies anticipated that FOSTA would be used more broadly than its proponents claimed.

    Huh. I wonder if the claimed avalanche of litigation that section 230 is supposed to have fended off was similarly fabricated. Then, if people opposed the CDA in its entirety, we wouldn’t be in this (ongoing) mess. If only someone had said something.

    1. Nope, it wasn’t fabricated.

  3. Just go all in on the butterfly nexus theory. Sue the ISP for allowing the network traffic, the hardware manufacturers for allowing the ISP to use their equipment, the utility for allowing the use of their electricity, the owner of the data center, the government for allowing all of them to operate, the Vatican for allowing God’s creation to be used for evil, …

    1. “the Vatican for allowing God’s creation to be used for evil,”

      Why not sue God himself. I’d love to see them try to serve that. 🙂

      1. You go for the wealth. What are you going to seize from God?

        1. The entire universe. Ultimately, God owns everything.

      2. Even if you managed to serve it, I’d think you’d have a jurisdiction issue.

    2. But Rat, if you allow one frivolous lawsuit, before you know it, you’ll have to allow all frivolous lawsuits. Courts will be overwhelmed and have no idea how to handle frivolous lawsuits. Bars and restaurants will close down, parks and playgrounds will sit empty, food production will cease, and society as we know it will end.

      All lawsuits should be prima facia open and shut with demonstrable and direct action for all parties involved. No diving into EULAs to see if contractual obligations were or weren’t followed, just 280-characters worth of investigation in order to tell people what is and isn’t right.

  4. Plaintiff lawyers in the Mailchimp case say that by letting YesBackpage use its software, Mailchimp was complicit in, and thus financially liable for, any crimes brokered through YesBackpage’s user-generated content. “Mailchimp’s marketing relationship with YesBackpage makes it responsible for its natural consequences—the sex trafficking of Jane Doe,” the suit states.

    I just looked up Mailchimp on Google, using a Microsoft app on my Samsung phone. Ka-ching!!!

    1. Don’t forget who sold and delivered the phone!

    2. The processor was a Qualcomm chip, and arm architecture!

  5. But FOSTA supporters insisted innocent companies would have nothing to worry about.

    Fine print: Nobody is innocent.

  6. Americans are so uptight about sex. Always wanting to intrude on other people’s lives. Apple pie and persecuting everyone for the actions of a few. Whether it is opiods, cough medicine, sex trafficking, or gun ownership. It is the great American way, like apple pie.
    Human trafficking is awful and should carry the death penalty, but come on. Sex is the most natural human instinct. EVERY human, post-puberty will have a large portion of their life consumed by it. Studies repeatedly show men and women think about it every few seconds.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.