The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has allowed a civil lawsuit against Salesforce to proceed, marking a significant development in legal efforts to hold technology companies accountable for providing infrastructure to platforms engaged in child sex trafficking. The case, G.G. v. Salesforce, centers on whether supplying business tools to a known trafficking venture constitutes participation under federal trafficking laws, challenging traditional interpretations of free speech protections for technology providers.
The lawsuit was brought under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) by a survivor of child sex trafficking through her mother. It alleges that Salesforce knowingly benefited from providing customized software to Backpage, a classifieds website whose adult services section became a leading platform for trafficking and prostitution. According to court documents, Salesforce supplied Backpage with customer relationship management tools that helped organize advertisers and track revenue, continuing these services after Backpage's involvement in sex trafficking became publicly known.
Backpage operated as a primary marketplace for sex trafficking, with traffickers using the platform to advertise victims including minors through coded language and pricing structures designed to avoid detection. Law enforcement agencies repeatedly identified Backpage as a trafficking hub, and federal authorities eventually seized the website. The lawsuit against Salesforce alleges that Backpage's operations relied on more than ad hosting, with backend business tools allowing the platform to manage high-volume advertisers and scale its operations.
The Seventh Circuit's ruling, issued on August 3, 2023, reversed an Illinois federal court's dismissal of the case. The appellate court held that the allegations were sufficient to proceed under the TVPA, which allows survivors to sue anyone who knowingly benefits from participation in a sex trafficking venture. The law doesn't require proving that a defendant directly trafficked victims or intended harm, but rather that they knowingly received something of value from participating in a venture engaged in trafficking while knowing or having reason to know about the illegal activity.
Salesforce had argued that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which generally prevents online platforms from being treated as publishers of third-party content, shielded the company from liability. However, the Seventh Circuit differentiated between publishing speech and providing services that allegedly helped a trafficking operation succeed, holding that Section 230 does not automatically bar claims based on "non-expressive conduct." The court's decision was not unanimous, with dissenting judges expressing concern that the ruling could broaden liability for companies doing business with bad actors.
This case represents a growing legal examination of how technology companies interact with platforms engaged in illegal activities. The ruling suggests that free speech protections may not extend to shielding companies from accountability if their conduct supports criminal exploitation. The lawsuit continues to move forward, with potential implications for how courts interpret the scope of the TVPA and the responsibilities of technology providers in the digital ecosystem. For more information about legal options under trafficking laws, visit https://fibichlaw.com/.
