Legal Battle Tests Technology Company Accountability in Child Sex Trafficking Cases

The ongoing litigation in G.G. v. Salesforce represents a significant legal test of when business relationships with known trafficking enterprises may constitute participation under federal law. The case, which includes attorney Tommy Fibich on the plaintiff's legal team, does not accuse Salesforce of directly creating ads or trafficking children but instead questions whether providing business infrastructure that helped a trafficking platform grow constitutes actionable participation. This lawsuit exemplifies the tension between established free speech protections for technology companies and federal statutes designed to combat sex trafficking, with courts increasingly examining technology that enables exploitation beyond merely hosting speech.

G.G. v. Salesforce is a civil lawsuit brought by a survivor of child sex trafficking under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). The plaintiff 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 the lawsuit, 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. An Illinois federal court initially dismissed the case, but a split Seventh Circuit panel reversed that decision on August 3, 2023, holding that the allegations were sufficient to proceed under the TVPA. Salesforce later sought rehearing, arguing the ruling stretched the statute too far, but the Seventh Circuit declined to revisit the decision in October 2023, allowing the lawsuit to move forward.

Backpage presented itself as a classified advertising site but operated as a primary marketplace for sex trafficking, with traffickers using the platform to advertise victims including minors through coded language and pricing structures. Law enforcement agencies repeatedly identified Backpage as a trafficking hub, and the company actively edited postings to conceal illegal conduct before 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. This case argues that when a technology company supplies tools that make sex trafficking possible, that support constitutes active participation in a trafficking venture rather than a neutral business relationship.

The TVPA offers survivors the opportunity to sue anyone who knowingly benefits from participation in a sex trafficking venture, without requiring proof that a defendant directly trafficked them or intended harm. A civil claim under the TVPA generally argues that the defendant knowingly received something of value as a result of participating in a venture that engaged in sex trafficking while knowing or having reason to know the venture involved trafficking. Congress drafted the law to reach facilitators and profiteers, not just traffickers, with "something of value" including service and licensing revenue and "participation" including conduct that helps the venture operate or expand.

Salesforce relied heavily on free speech principles and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which generally prevents online platforms from being treated as the publisher of third-party content. Salesforce argued that the claims attempted to impose liability based on content posted by others, but the Seventh Circuit rejected that framing at the current stage, differentiating between publishing speech and providing services that allegedly helped a trafficking operation succeed. The ruling did not decide the case on the merits but holds that Section 230 does not automatically bar claims based on non-expressive conduct. The dissenting judges expressed concern that the ruling could broaden liability for companies doing business with bad actors, while the majority held that free speech protections don't extend to shielding companies from accountability if their conduct supports criminal exploitation.

Sex trafficking survivors can file civil claims against traffickers and businesses that knowingly benefited from those operations, even when a company never interacted directly with the survivor. Potential defendants may include business partners that facilitated operations, payment processors, property owners, technology service providers, and website operators. Civil lawsuits can provide compensation for physical and emotional harm and other long-term losses from exploitation while exposing systems that allow trafficking to persist. Each claim depends on specific facts, with cases turning on what the defendant knew, when they knew it, and how their conduct supported the venture. G.G. v. Salesforce demonstrates that courts may allow survivors to proceed if they can plausibly show the defendant knowingly participated and benefited under the TVPA framework.