Victory for back page.com in CA Court

[+ pitman]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/california-judge-rejects-charges-involving-major-escort-site-43583132

 

Most people who work in one of the Superior Courts of CA (as do I) feel Ms. Harris' time would have been

better spent going after the massive corruption and abuse of power that has been going on in the Judicial Council of California for the last 15 years. If anyone is interested in this issue (our media sure aren't), the following is a good resource.

 

https://judicialcouncilwatcher.com

[adannyboy]

Not yet!

The judge held the tentative ruling to give the AG's office more time to submit additional evidence.

The AG is trying to hold the site owners liable for content that was put on a third party aggregate site (those sites that use webcrawlers to pull ads/text from one site and repost them on another.) one such site named in court was evilempire.com.

The AG has til the 28th to submit the brief and the defense has til the 5th of December to respond. A new court date is set for 12/9, but the judge is probably going to keep his (already written, 7 page) ruling.

 

Source: was in the courtroom last week.

[+ quoththeraven]

Given what happened to Rentboy and the current political climate I believe Backpage is fighting what will ultimately be a losing battle.

 

I am sure there were better targets for Ms. Harris' ire, but contrary to popular belief, there are many feminists who are pro-rights of sex workers, do not equate sex work with trafficking, and want sex work decriminalized and traffickers prosecuted instead. Most of the ones I know either write romance novels (including explicit sex scenes) or I've run into because they read or used to read romance novels.

 

Some women in this category, including some ex and current sex workers: Melissa Gira Grant; Rachel Kramer Bussel; Nina Hartley; Stoya. I'm sure there's more I'm not thinking of.

[adannyboy]

This has implications outside of trafficking which I'm hopeful will be its saving grace:

 

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/the-california-attorney-general-wants-to-imprison-the-owners-of-backpagecom-and-curtail-internet-freedom-8830950

 

I think backpage is just an easy target to use to set this precedent cuz who argues against trafficking?

 

A colleague of mine who has been both a trafficked person and a consensual worker thinks they've bastardized the word "pimp" in the process. She wishes her pimp had made her only pay $10 for an ad and left her alone the rest of the time.

[+ quoththeraven]

This has implications outside of trafficking which I'm hopeful will be its saving grace:

 

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/the-california-attorney-general-wants-to-imprison-the-owners-of-backpagecom-and-curtail-internet-freedom-8830950

 

I think backpage is just an easy target to use to set this precedent cuz who argues against trafficking?

 

A colleague of mine who has been both a trafficked person and a consensual worker thinks they've bastardized the word "pimp" in the process. She wishes her pimp had made her only pay $10 for an ad and left her alone the rest of the time.

 

Section 230 has the ability to be the saving grace, but only a determined litigant with deep pockets can stay the course to a potential Supreme Court hearing when demagogues can point to laws against prostitution and pimping and say adult services/escort ads enable trafficking. That's a difficult assertion to quarrel with; unfortunately, most Americans don't realize that decriminalizing consensual sex work by and with adults is the best way to attack trafficking and child prostitution.