![]() She also alleged that Salesforce worked closely with Backpage to develop “tailored” software, data services, marketing and operational support. claimed that Salesforce should have known that Backpage was engaged in illegal conduct when it began providing software and consulting to the website in 2013 – several years after state and federal officials publicly accused the site of being a haven for sex traffickers. As the majority opinion pointed out, the 7th Circuit has itself rejected cases accusing web hosting businesses and credit card companies of sex trafficking simply because alleged traffickers used their services.īut G.G. If her suit had only accused Salesforce of selling off-the-shelf software to Backpage, her allegations might not have sufficed, Hamilton wrote, since “participation” in a sex trafficking venture requires more than providing a common product or service, such as furniture or telephone lines or pizza, to a trafficker. alleged that Salesforce did not merely sell standard products to Backpage. G.G., Hamilton explained, asserted that Salesforce engaged in a “long-term contractual relationship” with Backpage, as part of a commercial venture that violated the anti-trafficking statute. The 7th Circuit majority, however, said that G.G.’s allegations against Salesforce were framed differently than claims in some of the hotel lawsuits. Salesforce had urged the appeals court to follow a recent series of rulings in which courts have rejected sex trafficking claims against hotels and hotel franchisers because individual plaintiffs failed to allege that hotel defendants knew or should have known of their specific victimization. looks forward to having her day in court,” Harris said. Warren Harris of Bracewell, who argued the case before the 7th Circuit, said by email that his clients are gratified by the ruling. and her mother are represented by Bracewell and Meyers & Flowers. failed to allege that the company participated in or profited from a sex trafficking venture or that Salesforce knew G.G. Salesforce's primary argument at the 7th Circuit was that it is shielded by Section 230. The company did not respond to a query sent to its investor relations department. Salesforce’s lawyers at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher did not respond to my query. The majority’s contrary ruling that plaintiffs need only to allege that defendants knew or should have known more broadly about the sex trafficking venture, Kirsch said, “would extend civil liability to nearly every company and individual who did regular and personalized business with Backpage after it faced public allegations of sex trafficking.” ![]() because she failed to allege its knowledge of her trafficking. In a dissenting opinion, Judge Thomas Kirsch agreed with Salesforce’s argument that it cannot be liable to G.G.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |