• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

hodayathink

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,052
The actual casting couch thing used to be partially real based on what someone said about Lisa Ann talking about it in an interview. All casting couch type scenes for at least a decade have all been fake because they're actual porn stars.

I wouldn't really call what GDP did a casting couch style, its a faux "I wanted to just try porn once" sort of thing. They pretend they know what they're getting into.

Even then, it's not that the casting couch scenes you used to see were real as much as "the casting couch" as an idea was real. I could get into the weeds and talk about what go-sees are and how they used to work in terms of this, but I'm not sure it's a conversation that fits this thread.
 

PanzerKraken

Member
Nov 1, 2017
14,985
For reference, here are a couple of pics of some of the women signing the contracts prior to filming:
9sKl1c8J.jpg

GirlsDoPorn.E440.BTS.1080p.x265.mkv.0005.jpg


As you can see, these aren't some thick stacks of dense paper. They had to have read over this thing, so I'm going to guess the producers falsified these contracts to get them to agree to it.

You would think, but so many people don't read contracts they sign or fully understand legal jargon used which is done on purpose to confuse ppl.
 
Summary of Witness testimony
OP
OP
jack_package_200
Oct 25, 2017
17,537

Doe 15, who began her testimony on Aug. 21, first encountered Pratt's business in February 2016. She was 18 at the time, in college, and looking for a job on Craigslist. She had been applying to jobs for a few months—some at local restaurants and sandwich shops, some for random gigs, but mostly for modeling or brief acting jobs. She found one listing titled "Exceptionally Cute Ladies Wanted." It linked to a website called BeginModeling.com, an unremarkable-looking webpage with several professional photos of women and a contact form. Doe 15 said she filled out the form—identifying her height, weight, hair color, and eye color—and attached a few pictures. She got a response not long later, but didn't reply. "It was pretty clear it was adult work," Doe 15 said, "and I wasn't interested in doing that."

Not long after the first email, Doe 15 was contacted again—this time, by a man who called himself "Jonathan N.," which the plaintiffs' attorney, Brian Holm, and several witnesses claim was a pseudonym for both Pratt and his male actor, Andre Garcia. Doe 15 says she FaceTimed with "Jonathan N." because he suggested that there was an option to do clothed modeling shoots for $300 each. But on the call, "Jonathan N." kept returning to the topic of nude modeling.

"He said it would be 30 minutes of filming sex," Doe 15 recalled in court. "He said it would be $5,000 dollars. He said specifically about five positions, five to seven minutes each. He would fly me out to San Diego, pay for a hotel. And then he just repeatedly said, 'Not online, not online, not in the U.S.' It would be on DVDs to Australia, the UK. And then he said a few other really remote countries, I don't remember. And then I asked if I could just do regular modeling, and he said no, it had to be both."

Doe 15 said she had concerns, but the fee seemed hard to turn down. Five thousand dollars was a lot of money. She was in school, without a job. Her mom was helping her, but she also had two other kids in college. Asking her for money was "the last thing I wanted to do," Doe 15 said. But "Jonathan N." promised she could talk to other actresses. There were supposedly more than 200 women, many of whom were Instagram models or sorority girls, who had taken the job and never been found out. On the phone, "Jonathan N." also mentioned that he had already booked a flight and hotel. He could cancel, he said, but he wanted to get the reservation just in case. The flight left in four days.

In an email response dated Feb. 22, 2016, Doe 15 wrote: "I am just hesitant on my face being out there or my name… Mostly if someone important in my future sees this."

Doe 15 texted Wright about her concerns. "I mean, I asked her all of my worries about it," she said in court. "I wanted to make sure that as another woman who had done it, it wouldn't be online. It wouldn't be in America and that my name wouldn't be used in it. I mean, not just that text alone, but I mean all of the texts together really smoothed my worries that, you know, it would be safe, and it wouldn't be going anywhere in the United States. It would be going where they told me. It smoothed almost all my worries."

Kaylin responded: "Yeah. So it goes out to wealthier countries, yeah, DVDs and stuff like that, but nothing online."

On the early morning of Feb. 28, 2016, Doe 15 flew to San Diego. The deal was to shoot for 30 minutes—five positions, five to seven minutes each—for $5,000. The tape would not go online. It would not be in the United States. It would be sold only on DVD in Australia and the U.K.. Doe 15 had grown up in Southern California, and had been to San Diego once or twice for soccer tournaments, but she didn't know the area well. When she got to the airport that day, Doe 15 said, she was stranded for over an hour. After a while, she was picked up by Teddy Gyi, the company's cameraman. Doe 15 said she was surprised by the disorganization—they drove around aimlessly for hours, picking up food, stopping in an apartment, switching cars, and meeting at the wrong hotel, before winding up at the shoot. In the hotel elevator, when a stranger commented on the camera, Gyi said they were "filming a wedding in town."

Once in the hotel room, Doe 15 went to makeup, chatting nervously with the artist. Then the male talent, Andre Garcia, walked in. "When he comes in, he just immediately goes to the bathroom and throws up for maybe five to ten minutes," Doe 15 recalled. "Teddy said that they had been drinking the night before, so I figured that was why. When he's done, though, he just kind of puts the toilet seat down and sits on the toilet and then pulls out a joint and offers it to me."

Doe 15 smoked with Garcia—a key sticking point in the trial, as her attorney would later claim it undermined her ability to sign contracts. She tried on the three outfits she'd brought, before Garcia settled on one. She signed some papers without reading them closely. (All the stuff she'd agreed to—anonymity, private distribution—that was all in there, the crew allegedly promised. Plus, Doe 15 recalled, they were under a time crunch; she needed to make her evening flight home.) But one thing Doe 15 did notice was her pay. Garcia paid her only $3,000, not the $5,000 previously agreed upon. He said she had bruises; she was pale. Doe 15 texted "Jonathan N.," but didn't know what else to say.

In the first moments of the shoot, the crew interviewed Doe 15 in front of the camera. It was a personal interview, covering intimate topics like, "my sex life, how I lost my virginity, where I had had sex before." She shared details only her sisters and close friend knew; made a joke about an ex she never thought he would hear. Doe 15 said she was told to "play up" the fantasy of it, but didn't think the interview would ever be public. Now that it is, Doe 15 said, "I feel humiliated."

After the shoot finished, Doe 15 told the court, she was upset. The adult portion had gone much longer than she had been told, and involved more than she was comfortable with. The feeling got worse when Garcia and Gyi, who was still filming, blocked her from taking a shower and insisted on another interview. "At that point I just kind of broke down and started crying," she said in her examination. "And then [Garcia] just kind of motioned for him to cut, and [Gyi] was like he was going to say something. But I just tried to be strong at that point and I tried to say, 'No, I'm done.' And I couldn't stop crying and then Andre just said, 'I'm done, let her go.' And so I just grabbed my stuff, and I left for the airport."

When Doe 15 left the shoot, she asked "Jonathan N." for a copy of her contract. She never received a copy. She never even heard the name of the company, "Girls Do Porn," until April 2016, when she says she received a screenshot from a friend of her porn video online.

In April 2016, after Doe 15's video appeared online, it seemed unavoidable. In the week after it aired, the video spread quickly across her friend group, family, workplace, and school. Her video was not only on GirlsDoPorn.com, but on major tube sites like PornHub, and on forums, like ImagePost and Girlsdoporn.blogspot.com, where users posted photos of her taken from social media and class presentations she hadn't made public. She was kicked off her cheerleading team; she began having panic attacks at work; once, she overheard a table of students talking about her video in the school cafeteria. "I had many different links sent to me and my friends," she said in court. "It pretty much seemed like it was everywhere online."

Her only recourse was Google. Online, she read about another girl who had been exposed on the same website. The other girl had deleted her social media, and no one seemed to know her number. But Doe 15 did some digging. She Googled one of Girls Do Porn's parent companies, BLL Media. "I Googled BLL Media lawsuit, just to be hopeful that somebody was doing something about it, and I found an article and I sent it to my mom," she told attorney Brian Holm, who represents the 22 plaintiffs in court. "And she called you."

In the final minutes of Doe 15's testimony, the judge, Kevin A. Enright, sent her out of the courtroom so he could confer with the lawyers. Pratt's defense attorneys wanted to screen the video of her in front of the courtroom—the video in which she is nude and stoned; the one she recorded believing it would be private—and have her narrate the scene to the public. Holm, her lawyer, called the request "undue harassment"—a microcosm of the central concern of the case. "Given what this case is about and keeping privacy," Holm told the court, "she's now going to be in a courtroom… discussing and watching a very private moment being completely nude. That's exactly what the bill of lies she was sold [said] would never happen."

On at least that front, the judge agreed
.
 

Deleted member 11413

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,961
That story is harrowing. There need to be much stricter regulations on porn production, because it is an extremely exploitative industry
 

JCG

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,533
This whole thing sounds bad and people being misled about what was going to happen with the footage is unethical.

That said, the idea you could ever keep pornography from being posted online, legally or illegally, is naive. It doesn't justify the lies and exploitation, however.
 

skullmuffins

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,419
they're now facing criminal charges for sex trafficking, not just the civil lawsuit



GirlsDoPorn Owners and Employees Charged in Sex Trafficking Conspiracy

Assistant U. S. Attorneys Joseph Green (619) 546-6955 and Sabrina Feve (619) 546-6786

SAN DIEGO – The owners and two employees of the popular adult websites GirlsDoPorn and GirlsDoToys were charged in federal court today with sex trafficking crimes in connection with a scheme to deceive and coerce young women to appear in sex videos.

According to a complaint, owners Michael James Pratt and Matthew Isaac Wolfe along with adult film performer and producer Ruben Andre Garcia and administrative assistant Valorie Moser used deception and false promises to lure the victims, who had responded to ads for modeling jobs that would supposedly pay $5,000. Eventually the women were told the job was really for adult films.

To persuade the women to participate, the defendants convinced them they could remain anonymous and that their videos would not be posted on the internet. In reality, the entire purpose was to post the videos on the internet. According to financial records, the websites have generated more than $17 million in revenue.

According to the complaint, the circumstances were not at all what was promised. Some of the women were pressured into signing documents without reviewing them and then threatened with legal action or outing if they failed to perform; some were not permitted to leave the shooting locations until the videos were made; family and friends and the general public eventually saw the videos online; some victims were harassed and ridiculed and estranged from their families as a result; and some were sexually assaulted and in at least one case raped. Some were forced to perform certain sex acts they had declined to do, or they would not be paid or allowed to leave.

Garcia was arrested on October 9; Wolfe was taken into custody Tuesday by immigration officials and transferred to federal criminal custody. They were arraigned this afternoon. Moser's arraignment is scheduled for tomorrow before U.S. Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez. Pratt is a fugitive.
 
Last edited:

Catdaddy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,963
TN
Good...hope they get the max... The main guy fled the country...

Damn, didn't know this was a Fed case, just thought was civil...
 
Last edited:

Baji Boxer

Chicken Chaser
Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,378
they're now facing criminal charges for sex trafficking, not just the civil lawsuit



Glad to hear they're being charged and it's not just a civil case. The women were trafficked and basically raped/sexually assaulted for profit.

One thing I'm confused about though is that they still seem to be in business? I checked and their Pornhub Channel is still there, and when going to their website, they just updated today with a new girl. WTF?
 

Deleted member 2809

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,478
Two things:

First, it seems that the trafficking charges finally got Pornhub to take their channel down:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/43kb5q/pornhub-finally-removes-girls-do-porn

Second, if you thought this story couldn't get more sickening, it turns out it can:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/andre...lt-by-over-two-dozen-women-i-told-him-to-stop
Not surprised at all that a guy who tricks women into shooting porn is a sexual assaulter
 

FFNB

Associate Game Designer
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
6,090
Los Angeles, CA

A US judge has awarded $12.8m (£9.8m) to 22 unnamed women, ruling that they were tricked into appearing in widely distributed online porn videos.

Good. My heart goes out to the victims. $12.8 million spread out across 22 women seems paltry considering the damage that's been done to many of their lives and reputations. In either case, I'm glad they won. I was worried that the GDP people would find some way to weasel out of it. Fuck those guys.
 

JCG

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,533
Nice to know that they're actually getting some compensation for the resulting troubles and harm they suffered.
 
Mar 29, 2018
7,078

A US judge has awarded $12.8m (£9.8m) to 22 unnamed women, ruling that they were tricked into appearing in widely distributed online porn videos.
Thank christ.

Suck that out of your pockets, scumbags.

My fucking god

Good. My heart goes out to the victims. $12.8 million spread out across 22 women seems paltry considering the damage that's been done to many of their lives and reputations. In either case, I'm glad they won. I was worried that the GDP people would find some way to weasel out of it. Fuck those guys.
Yeah, about 500,000 each right. At least that's enough to set you up for life if you invest carefully enough.
 

rsfour

Member
Oct 26, 2017
16,749
SHould've been more money, and it's unfortunate that it wasn't all the women that got conned by all the trash behind GDP, etc.

22 out of maybe even a few hundred women.
 

perfectchaos007

It's Happening
Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,233
Texas
Good. My heart goes out to the victims. $12.8 million spread out across 22 women seems paltry considering the damage that's been done to many of their lives and reputations. In either case, I'm glad they won. I was worried that the GDP people would find some way to weasel out of it. Fuck those guys.

Don't know if it's over yet. They can probably go to some legal wealth management firm to show documentation they don't have the funds to pay the victims. Not sure how much money these guys actually made from the business or how much money they still have left...
 

kittens

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,237
This is so deeply fucked up. Imagine trying to lure young girls into this fucking trap. Disgusting.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,342
Don't know if it's over yet. They can probably go to some legal wealth management firm to show documentation they don't have the funds to pay the victims. Not sure how much money these guys actually made from the business or how much money they still have left...

I'd be amazed if their victims see barely a penny of the ordered sum.
 

Xyber

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,293
User Banned (2 weeks): victim blaming
That's great news.

I still don't understand how you can be so naive to think any porn you record today would not end up online though. No matter if the "contracts" they signed said so or not, the people who would get their hands on the video would most likely upload it anyway.

There definitely needs to be more done to educate teens about stuff like this.
 

Doober

Banned
Jun 10, 2018
4,295
I had a pretty donkey-brained take when I first heard of this story. The surface facts made it sound a LOT less predatory at a glance. But those testimonies are godawful, and it's left me feeling kind of guilty about porn in general.

I sincerely hope the whole industry isn't this rotten, and yet I get the feeling that it totally is.
 

GaimeGuy

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,092
I had a pretty donkey-brained take when I first heard of this story. The surface facts made it sound a LOT less predatory at a glance. But those testimonies are godawful, and it's left me feeling kind of guilty about porn in general.

I sincerely hope the whole industry isn't this rotten, and yet I get the feeling that it totally is.
It definitely is. And once you're in it, society won't let you out, if you're a woman. Sasha Grey is one of the few I can think of who got out, although with a ton of backlash during the early 2010s.

Men have it easier. I think I read somewhere that Lexington Steele became a stock broker
 
OP
OP
jack_package_200
Oct 25, 2017
17,537
I had a pretty donkey-brained take when I first heard of this story. The surface facts made it sound a LOT less predatory at a glance. But those testimonies are godawful, and it's left me feeling kind of guilty about porn in general.

I sincerely hope the whole industry isn't this rotten, and yet I get the feeling that it totally is.
Honestly if you want porn without the guilt, your best option is to buy access to a woman's snap or onlyfans
 

Biggersmaller

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,966
Minneapolis
User Banned (3 months): dismissing concerns surrounding sexual assault
This whole thing sounds bad and people being misled about what was going to happen with the footage is unethical.

That said, the idea you could ever keep pornography from being posted online, legally or illegally, is naive. It doesn't justify the lies and exploitation, however.

That's great news.

I still don't understand how you can be so naive to think any porn you record today would not end up online though. No matter if the "contracts" they signed said so or not, the people who would get their hands on the video would most likely upload it anyway.

There definitely needs to be more done to educate teens about stuff like this.

There is much more to this than people being mislead. There are accusations of rape, denied payments, and threats of violence to ensure shooting would be completed. Frankly, there is no defense for this. These fuckers deserve to be in prison if true.

I will concede that the majority of the harm caused was from the intense shame of having a sex tape released. Most of these women were fully committed to filming sex for money, they just expected it to be released to private foreign buyers. I must confess, some of their testimony demonstrated such a wild total lack of common sense - even at the age of 18 - that it makes their stories less believable to me.
 

HylianSeven

Shin Megami TC - Community Resetter
Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,036
There is much more to this than people being mislead. There are accusations of rape, denied payments, and threats of violence to ensure shooting would be completed. Frankly, there is no defense for this. These fuckers deserve to be in prison if true.

I will agree that the majority of the harm caused was from the intense shame of having a sex tape released. We must remember most of these women were fully committed to filming sex for money, they just expected it to be released to private foreign buyers. I must confess, some of their testimony demonstrated such a wild total lack of common sense - even at the age of 18 - that it makes their stories less believable to me.
I thought this wasn't even the case...they thought it was just some modeling gig.
 

Biggersmaller

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,966
Minneapolis
I thought this wasn't even the case...they thought it was just some modeling gig.

They did use craigslist modeling ads for this. However, these women were told it was a porn shoot for a private porn collection before being flown out to San Diego. Understandably they would sometimes have a change of heart once they arrived and faced a naked dude in-front of a professional production crew asking to sign a contract. I assume that's when the abuse would happen as it would piss off the people cutting checks when a woman would say no.
 

Biske

Member
Nov 11, 2017
8,255
Welp that's fucking horrific.
Time to cancel all that type and style of porn.

Already people should be paying for their porn and ideally not using tube sites which greatly help in fucking people over. But certainly at the very least this type of 'oh we are fucking a random naive girl's has to fucking die.

Just way to easy to support this horrific shit without doing your research first.
 

Elderly Parrot

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Aug 13, 2018
3,146
Welp that's fucking horrific.
Time to cancel all that type and style of porn.

Already people should be paying for their porn and ideally not using tube sites which greatly help in fucking people over. But certainly at the very least this type of 'oh we are fucking a random naive girl's has to fucking die.

Just way to easy to support this horrific shit without doing your research first.
The company that owns the pay sites wants you to use tube sites they own for ad revenue from ad providers they own and can cut the royalties to actors. All a part of the plan
 

JoJo'sDentCo

Unshakable Resolve
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,535
Thank christ.

Suck that out of your pockets, scumbags.


My fucking god


Yeah, about 500,000 each right. At least that's enough to set you up for life if you invest carefully enough.
I bet they only get a small portion of that $500k. My mom won a $900k case and only got $180k because of a bunch of legal bs and lawyers fees on top of that.