Backpage's CEO Carl Ferrer took a plea deal one day before the site got shut down:
The CEO and co-founder of the classified ad website Backpage.com cut a plea deal with state and federal prosecutors, admitting that he knew that the site had become a massive online marketplace for prostitution. Carl Ferrer, 57, agreed to plead guilty to charges in state courts in Texas and California and federal charges in Arizona in a bid to resolve an array of criminal investigations he was facing over his role in the site. The plea deal appears to limit Ferrer's total potential prison time to no more than five years.
"I have long been aware that the vast majority of these advertisements are, in fact, advertisements for prostitution services (which are not protected by the First Amendment and which are illegal in 49 states and much of Nevada)," Ferrer acknowledged in a written statement that was part of the plea bargain.
During a lengthy Senate investigation, Ferrer and other Backpage officials insisted they were policing the website aggressively to remove such advertising. However, Ferrer admitted in the plea deal that those efforts were just window dressing. "I worked with my co-conspirators to create 'moderation' processes through which Backpage would remove terms and pictures that were particularly indicative of prostitution and then publish a revised version of the ad," he said in the plea document. "It was merely intended to create a veneer of deniability for Backpage."
The Washington Post reports that Ferrer agreed to testify against co-founders Michael Lacey and James Larkin.
The organizers of the Women's March have tweeted their opposition to the Backpage shutdown. Some conservatives are not amused, but sex workers have been critical of the shutdown and the passage of the SESTA law:
"Girls are going back to the streets and they are going to die in the streets, and nobody cares," said Calida, a mother of two, who said she used to do street work and fears she will have to start again to make ends meet. "Everybody is terrified."
Texas Attorney General statement, California Attorney General statement, and DoJ statement. Also at LA Times, NYT, and Ars Technica.
"Yesterday, President Trump signed the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 (FOSTA), which gives both law enforcement officials and victims new tools to fight sex trafficking. Read more in today's 1600 Daily: 45.wh.gov/HHLb37"
9:02 AM - 12 Apr 2018" twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/984461642879643648
[takyon Note: SESTA is the U.S. Senate bill, FOSTA is the House bill, and the joint proposal is known as the "FOSTA-SESTA package".]
Previously: U.S. Congress Passes SESTA/FOSTA Law
FBI Seizes backpage.com and Affiliates
Related Stories
In Passing SESTA/FOSTA, Lawmakers Failed to Separate Their Good Intentions from Bad Law
The U.S. Senate just voted 97-2 to pass the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA, H.R. 1865), a bill that silences online speech by forcing Internet platforms to censor their users. As lobbyists and members of Congress applaud themselves for enacting a law tackling the problem of trafficking, let's be clear: Congress just made trafficking victims less safe, not more.
The version of FOSTA that just passed the Senate combined an earlier version of FOSTA (what we call FOSTA 2.0) with the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA, S. 1693). The history of SESTA/FOSTA—a bad bill that turned into a worse bill and then was rushed through votes in both houses of Congress—is a story about Congress' failure to see that its good intentions can result in bad law. It's a story of Congress' failure to listen to the constituents who'd be most affected by the laws it passed. It's also the story of some players in the tech sector choosing to settle for compromises and half-wins that will put ordinary people in danger.
[...] Throughout the SESTA/FOSTA debate, the bills' proponents provided little to no evidence that increased platform liability would do anything to reduce trafficking. On the other hand, the bills' opponents have presented a great deal of evidence that shutting down platforms where sexual services are advertised exposes trafficking victims to more danger.
Freedom Network USA—the largest national network of organizations working to reduce trafficking in their communities—spoke out early to express grave concerns [.pdf] that removing sexual ads from the Internet would also remove the best chance trafficking victims had of being found and helped by organizations like theirs as well as law enforcement agencies.
Notorious website backpage.com has been seized according to NY Daily News.
Sex ads platform Backpage.com was seized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation Friday hours after its founder's Phoenix home was raided.
Visitors to the site landed on a notice from the federal government announcing its seizure.
"Backpage.com and affiliated websites have been seized as part of an enforcement action by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, and the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division, with analytical assistance from the Joint Regional Intelligence Center," the announcement read.
Founder's home also raided by the FBI Friday morning.
U.S. Government Seizes backpage.com
The FBI, Justice Department, and other agencies have seized backpage.com, and one of the co-founders had their home raided:
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday April 13 2018, @06:10PM (3 children)
> "[prostitutes] are going to die in the streets" (...) "Everybody is terrified."
"A few broken eggs in service of my veneer of self-righteousness. Great campaign ads about family values, I can hear the contributions rolling in. Now, where is that escort you ordered, Jarvis? I only have an hour left before Church."
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday April 13 2018, @06:11PM (2 children)
Finally, a proper application for digital voice
servantsassistants.[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday April 13 2018, @06:44PM (1 child)
Which one of Amazon, Google, Facebook or Apple will get to log your Saturday preference for Polish Transsexual Midget Hookers?
I'm really wondering what kind of ads you will subsequently get.
Amazon would probably be the best choice, given how they always try to sell you again exactly what you just bought from them.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @07:48PM
Really? Really?? I can't believe you went there. Everybody knows that Saturday is "UN Surpise" day so the nationality of the transsexual midget hookers doesn't matter.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday April 13 2018, @06:11PM (3 children)
So I realize that this was probably the point of the juxtaposition in the summary, but if the government could already go in and get people who are knowingly facilitating crime on websites..... what was the point of passing FOSTA-SESTA?
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday April 13 2018, @06:12PM (1 child)
New tools! We need new tools!
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @06:58PM
Darn straight we do. The ones in office right now are even bigger idiots than they were expected to be.
(Score: 5, Informative) by stretch611 on Friday April 13 2018, @06:27PM
To cripple Section 230 of the CDA [wikipedia.org].
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @06:24PM (5 children)
Shame on you Americans for not enforcing your own written statutes! You only prove that words have no meaning, and what little they may have is totally based on the whimsy of the day and the mood of the judge. *For Shame!*
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @06:42PM
Huh? Where does it say that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances? Huh buddy? You some kind of commie? How many glasses of water do you drink every day?
Er, er, wrong angle. I'll come in again.
Huh? Where does it say that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press? Huh buddy? You some kind of misogynerd? Why do you hate women? You only hate women and want them to be prostitutes because you're a creepy incel who can't get laid!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @06:56PM (3 children)
Not that I disagree with your sentiment that the US Congress has been way out of line for a while, but I'm not seeing anything in the Constitution that would cover prostitution. I think it should be legal since prohibition historically leads to worse outcomes overall, but again I don't see the hypocrisy beyond "land of the free except for a,b,c,d,e,f,g......................."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @07:30PM (1 child)
The Constitution does not enumerate all the rights of the people. I lists the powers granted to Federal Government. Far too many people fail to recognize that.
Better to ask, where in the Constitution does it forbid Prostitution?
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Friday April 13 2018, @07:57PM
It also makes a number of things off-limits to the Federal Government. You'll find many of those in the bill of rights, although there are a few scattered elsewhere, for example the ex post facto clause in Article I.
Which is not to say that they don't do their very best to ignore, obfuscate, and engage in sophist hoop jumping over, every little jot and tittle therein.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @07:58PM
Well, the Constitution certainly mentions freedom of speech, and taking down entire websites violates freedom of speech. So, there you go.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @09:25PM (5 children)
In this thread people can defend the trafficking of children. The *OWNERS* of the website admitted as much. This is not a free speech issue. Unless you think little kids do not get a say and only the adults taking advantage of them do.
(Score: 3, Touché) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday April 13 2018, @10:23PM (3 children)
Assuming this isn't a troll, so I'll bite.
[Citations needed.] Who in this thread has defended trafficking of children? Where in the plea agreement does it indicate that child trafficking was fostered by backpage? Prostitution was, by their admission. While I'll readily stipulate child trafficking can occur in prostitution, first you show me where this is anything but your red herring.
No, they admitted to fostering prostitution by their own act in the plea agreement. A plea agreement secured without this act which compromises speech. Because this bill is holding the bulletin board owner liable for messages posted on the bulletin board. Just "on the Internet." Because that is WAY easier than actually doing police work to isolate and arrest the POSTERS, who committed the crimes.
Where Backpage IS guilty, as in the plea agreement, is that they intervened directly in the ad process - THEY edited the ads, which made them complicit.
So now Personals ads are gone. Because they were used for prostitution as well as hook-ups. That IS a chilling effect of speech whether you want to admit it or not.
And here's a hot flash: If you are worried about child trafficking - I really am too - how much child trafficking will be eliminated by SESTA-FOSTA? Answer: NONE. It will still happen. What just really happened was that law enforcement just lost a GREAT tool to go after the traffickers - the criminals instead of the publishers. (And again, if the publishers got invovled... well the Fed just showed you how it could be taken down without this law.)
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @11:58PM (2 children)
How much child sex trafficking might be eliminated by eliminating politicians? They are after all one of the largest groups misusing their authority to abuse children, often having it covered up by federal authorities such as MI5, or the FBI in exchange for political favors involving law enforcement friendly laws or financial benefits. And since each branch of government is washing the other's hands, how are they to be held accountable except at the end of a rope, barrel or tip of a spear?
(Score: 3, Touché) by takyon on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:09AM (1 child)
That sounds like something the Antichrist would say.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @10:12AM
Must be a nice guy.
(Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Friday April 13 2018, @10:42PM
Enabling safer sex work != enabling the trafficking of children. If anything, Backpage provided a convenient conduit for LEOs to find traffickers and bring them to justice. Meanwhile, sex workers have found Backpage and related sites helpful in weeding out bad clients and reducing physical risks.
One owner, singular so far, was coerced into signing a statement crafted by the DOJ. He had been through legal battles over the site before and probably didn't feel like risking being imprisoned for decades of his life by fighting the government on these charges. Either way, he was made an example of.
Running a website is a free speech issue.
*Yawns* (plural)
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]