What kind of child pornography lawsuit is Visa facing?
The financial company Visa may face charges in connection with the receipt of income from the distribution of child pornography. This is reported by the BBC channel.
We are talking about an eight-year-old case, when pornographic videos featuring a 13-year-old American woman appeared on the Pornhub website. Now the girl claims that the materials were used without her consent.
What is the story behind the appearance of child pornography on the site Pornhub?
According to Serena Flates, in 2014 year, a young man forced her to star in a candid video, which he posted on the Pornhub website. At that time, the girl was 13 years old. She did not give consent to the publication of the video.
According to Flaytes, when she discovered a pornographic video with her participation on the site, he managed to gain 400,000 views. Later, the girl contacted Mindgeek, which owns Pornhub. Posing as the mother of the “actress”, she said that the video qualifies as child pornography.
A few weeks later, the video was deleted, but portal users managed to download it and re-upload it to the site several times. As a result, one of the “copies” The video has been viewed 2.7 million times. According to the girl, MindGeek continued to earn advertising income from these re-uploads, while her life "out of control". Flates claims that over the years she tried to commit suicide several times, and her relationship with her family soured, because of which she moved in with a friend and started using illegal substances. In order to pay for her addiction, underage Selena re-recorded several pornographic videos, some of which were uploaded to Pornhub.
The company MindGeek told the channel that at the moment, the court has not yet ruled on the veracity of the plaintiff's statements.
How did Visa get into the center of this scandal?
According to Flates, Visa, which handles advertising revenue, colluded with MindGeek to make money from its child pornography videos.
Visa says that working with MindGeek does not imply that Visa has agreed to participate in any sexual exploitation. In addition, commercial relations in themselves are not grounds for collusion.
However, the court was told that at this stage of the proceedings, “it is safe to conclude that Visa intended to help MindGeek monetize child porn based on the fact that Visa continued to provide funds to MindGeek to do so, knowing about the activities of MindGeek». Thus, it could be that Visa “intentionally provided a tool to commit a crime.”
Source: https://www.bbc.com/
Rate the material