A new Craigslist personals trafficking bill aims to crack down on the use of websites that knowingly facilitate trafficking. This means that the owner of a site could held accountable for what they do on their website, even if it isn’t intentional. Critics worry that the new law will stifle free speech online. But, if successful, it could help to limit the opportunity for traffickers to sell women and children online.
Legislation aims to hold websites accountable for “knowingly” facilitating trafficking
In an effort to curb online sex trafficking, Congress is attempting to curb “hands off” practices of some sites. Websites like Craigslist have faced criticism for their role in facilitating prostitution. This led to a recent decision by the site to shut down its personals section.
The Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act, or SESTA, received bipartisan support from senators and congressmen, and has passed in the U.S. Senate with 97-2 votes.
Proponents of the bill believe that it will allow sex trafficking victims to hold sites accountable for their facilitation of sex trafficking. Under the new law, a website operator could face 25 years in prison and fines if they found to have helped facilitate sex trafficking. However, critics believe that the bill may also have unintended consequences.
Critics of the legislation argue that the language used in the bill may be unconstitutional, and that it could chill free speech. Some have suggested that the law will create more censorship in the online world. Others have noted that it will force smaller companies to leave the market.
Most websites are law abiding, and many are working to end sex trafficking. Still, experts believe that there will likely be more unreported cases. That could lead to more crimes in the dark web.
Prosecutors will have a hard time proving that the website operators or ISPs knew about pimps selling flesh and sex services. They will have to prove that they assisted the trafficking in an intentional or accidental manner.
Many tech companies have voiced concerns about the new law. Tech firms are concerned that it will stifle online speech, and that it may even force them out of business.
However, some smaller internet companies, including Reddit, are trying to make changes. They have already banned several subreddits and fora related to escort services. Other companies have also pushed back against the law.
The Internet Association, which includes Google, Microsoft, and Amazon, says it is committed to fighting trafficking on the internet. The National Center on Missing and Exploited Children and Polaris, an anti-slavery group, have supported the act.
Platform owners could held accountable
The Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) is new legislation that passed by Congress to help reduce sex trafficking. It allows law enforcement to pursue sites that are involved in sex trafficking.
In the past, websites protected by Section 230 of the FTC Act, which protects entities that operate online. However, the DOJ recently proposed a revision that would remove this immunity.
The new legislation could change the landscape for companies like Craigslist and Backpage. If these sites host sex trafficking discussions, they could face stiff penalties.
As the site owner, Craigslist will need to take measures to ensure that the community remains safe. They may need to revamp the website or add a section to prevent child exploitation. Some sex workers have voiced concern that this legislation could put them at risk.
In addition to the new legislation, the Internet Association, a group composed of companies like Amazon and Netflix, argues that the bill is crucial to fighting sex trafficking. Other platforms could follow the lead of Reddit, which banned a long-running sex worker forum, and has since begun removing communities for casual sexual encounters and escort services.
Although the bill has approved by Congress and expected to signed into law soon, critics argue that some of the language in the FOSTA is unconstitutional and will chill free speech. Others believe the proposed legislation will only exacerbate the problems of sex traffickers.
One of the first casualties of the new legislation is the Craigslist personals page. This section attracted listings for all types of people. Before the FOSTA law, Craigslist was immune from liability. But this was no longer the case, and the site closed its entire personals page.
Many stakeholders have criticized the legislation, citing the chilling effect it will have on free speech. Others have called for a full repeal of Section 230.
Finally, some groups think that the FOSTA law will only increase the number of children targeted by sex traffickers. The truth is that the bill’s true impact may be less tangible than those who advocate it.
Critics worry the bill will stifle free speech online
A new bill aimed at fighting sex trafficking on the Internet has received criticism from pro-free speech advocates. Critics worry the legislation will stifle free speech on the Internet and will make it more difficult to expose sex traffickers.
The Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) approved by the U.S. Senate with 97 votes. However, critics fear the legislation will chill online speech and stifle the ability of online platforms to moderate legal content.
Several tech companies have expressed concerns about the proposed law, which could ensnare them in legal and regulatory disputes. These tech companies point out that Section 230 protects them from liability for any content that users post to their websites.
While some argue that the anti-sex trafficking bill is necessary to prevent children from becoming victims of online exploitation, others believe it is an overly broad attempt to regulate the Internet. Many have argued that the bill would impose unnecessary burdens on Internet platforms, and will push many smaller, more innovative companies out of business.
The House of Representatives passed similar legislation earlier this year, but it failed to win the support of the U.S. President. Now the Portman-Blumenthal bill has 68 co-sponsors in the Senate. It would give state prosecutors the ability to prosecute websites that violate federal sex trafficking laws.
Supporters of the Portman-Blumenthal bill believe it will give law enforcement new tools to prosecute sex traffickers. They also believe the bill will help victims of sex trafficking get the justice they deserve.
In response to the bill, the Internet Association and other tech companies have urged Congress to change the wording of the bill to clarify that Section 230 does not apply to a website that knowingly facilitates sex trafficking. But the wording remains ambiguous, leaving the question open for debate.
There have been several recent cases of online service liability for human trafficking. Backpage, for example, found liable for facilitating child sex trafficking. As such, the company filtered keywords pertaining to minors and removed them from its platform.
