1:30:14 By accident. By serendipity, actually. Serendipity would be the right thing. The premier place for escorts to advertise their wares is Backpage I don't know if that's international but i'm sure it is in the United States and... They were shut down in the United States Well so this just happened this just happened two days ago The back page shut down their adult entertainment category. And if you go there now, then you click on any of the categories of adult entertainment which is code for hookers. It says censored! The government has unconstitutionally censored this content and then it has some links what happened find out use your social media to support free speech blah blah okay
1:31:11 Now, the allegation of course for a long time which started with Craigslist is that these advertisements often are used for human trafficking child prostitution etc. Which I'm sure there's a level of that no doubt about it but they are now being hauled in back page that is and this is a conversation between Senator Portman who is questioning the CEO of Backpage about their practices. But what the reasoning they use to say, you are bad, you are horrible, you're breaking the law which I believe to be incorrect
1:31:58 is quite interesting and I think very, very important for the internet and services on the internet in general. So to set that up we have the Digital Millennium Copyright Act And what was the genius of this act? Is that it said... That if you are just a place where people post content You are not liable for what happens or what is being said Am I summing that up correctly? It's an element, a digital millennium copyright act. It was a lot bigger than that it was mostly about back engineering and things like reverse engineering right things like but this is the entire reason that we can have Twitter that we can have YouTube that we can all these different things That was the entire reason because you're not editorializing
1:32:47 You are not a news... And this is important. Yeah, and it began with Yahoo groups and some of these other things. So this isn't important now listen to what he's saying Mr. Ferrer your company has repeatedly avoided liability by invoking section 230 of the Communications Decency Act Okay should we listen to just for second? Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and in this it says No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker Of any information provided by another information content provider. So in other words, these are online intermediaries That was the entire idea... Okay, could you read that again? Yeah sure
1:33:35 No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker... ...of any information provided by another information content provider. So this means if I think it actually also means if they have an RSS feed and post something that is defamatory, that I cannot be held liable because I am not a publisher. If it's just stuff people post in comments or anything of the like. Okay? So that's what it says. Mr. Ferrer, your company has repeatedly avoided liability by invoking Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act that's been referenced a couple times here this morning. This act protects websites who just post content created by third parties
1:34:29 But our report issued today and posted yesterday afternoon demonstrates conclusively that your reliance on this Communications Decency Act section has not been accurate. It's been a fraud, frankly, on the courts, on the victims you sued who sued you and on the public." Why do I say that? I say that because Backpage took an active hand in creating ads on your site as I talked about my opening statement. You systematically deleted words phrases and images submitted by users It revealed that the posted ad is for an illegal transaction, not just prostitution but also child sex trafficking. Documents show that you called the practice stripping out content from an ad. You even maintained an extensive strip
1:35:12 and strip term from ad list of words that we talked about earlier. Let me explain what he's talking about on many sites when you, uh... in chat rooms all over the internet I'll give you a good example Airbnb does not want you to communicate through anything but the Airbnb system when you reserve an Airbnb so if you type in your phone number or email address Airbnb strips that out in the messaging system Okay, that's what they're talking about stripping out things. It's basically saying okay for some reason why because it's a it's a Silicon Valley thing right? Okay go let's talk about one of the words on that list This is an email you received from mr. Padilla explaining that he was preparing his spreadsheet of and I quote
1:35:58 the most current list of coded terms set to be stripped out. In the document in front of you, uh, you've highlighted one of the many words on that list um can you read that highlighted word on that list? What an asshole! After consultation... Hold on, hold stop it a second now what I'm getting from this so far is that this guy, the senator or whoever it is, I can't you mentioned him yeah Portman, uh is grilling this guy for doing this because if he wasn't doing this they would It would give him the right to publish all this child. In other words, he's encouraging Child trafficking yeah not the guy that does back page but the senator well So the Senator but the Senator is trying to say or is it a there's that a car? That's a congressman No, this is senator Okay, the Senators trying to say your ads Advertise
1:36:53 child trafficking, human trafficking, child sex prostitution etc. and he's connecting that by saying you automatically strip out words which is going to say in a moment you automatically strip out words therefore your editorializing just keep listening word on that list so it really nice could you please read the first word on that list can you read that highlighted word on that list After consultation with counsel I declined to answer your question based on the rights provided by the first and fifth amendments. In that case, I'll read it the word is lolita there are some other words on that list teenage rape young just so everyone understands this is a document listing code words to be stripped out of advertisements uh and the ads were then posted on the internet on back page anyway um consistent with what we talked about in the opening statement this was a way
1:37:51 to edit these ads, but still take the payment and profit from the ads. Next question Mr. Farrar if an underage girl is being sold for sex on Backpage and her pimp puts the word lolita in the advertisement stripping that term out of the ad doesn't magically change the girls age does it? After consultation with counsel I declined to answer your question based on the rights provided by the first and fifth amendments Okay so he's very...and i like that! I've never heard taking the fifth by adding the first I like that and that was pretty cool Now, here's the problem. What the senator is saying is when you automatically by computer systems strip out certain words which could be F-words S-words all kinds of things this has done all over the internet You are then editorializing because you then still take money and place the ad And I think back pages for them to shut down their adult services it's going to hurt local commerce
1:38:51 I'm not kidding. It's much bigger than anybody realizes, but the senator is incorrect specifically there are a number of court cases that have gone through this. The Fourth Circuit lawsuits seeking to hold a service liable for its exercise of a publishers traditional editorial function such as deciding whether to publish withdraw postpone or alter content are barred The purpose of this statutory immunity is not difficult to discern. Congress recognized the threat that tort-based lawsuits pose to freedom of speech in the new and burgeoning internet medium, Section 230 was enacted in part to maintain the robust nature of internet communication." And there are many lawsuits where this type of editorializing is not seen as editorializing and therefore you still have the safe harbor if this is successful whatever they're trying to do I don't know if there's an actual lawsuit if this is successful
1:39:48 Then, I mean how can you apply that to adult services advertisements but not to Facebook or Twitter or YouTube or any of these systems? Well, you'd have to. Exactly! So that's why I find this to be incredibly interesting and very important. I think it is and there we have it... That clip sucked. I kicked- I- You missed the ball. Hey! Lucy pulled the ball out from under me. Play this little ISO I have, Reptile Wins. Yeah we love the ISOs. What is that from?
1:40:59 It was some stupid thing I was watching and every once in a while they'd show it. It's one of these things where they're showing all these supposed reptiles in the media, and then you know, they'd show a digit... The guy would go out of whack because the digitization didn't work and he would make it look like he was changing, he was doing what do you call it? Shapeshifting! And every time they did it, it would go REPTILE! Reptile, then they had at the end it was reptile wins. I like that. It was referring to Katy Perry. I'm supposed to be a... Go ahead. Okay ask the question whatever it was no go ahead please. I want to play this little thing since we were talking about those hearings and I just have to play this one