Backpage.com's days are numbered, Washington lawyer predicts

Three young girls who say Backpage.com did nothing to prevent their victimization in sex trafficking and profited from their plight will have their day in court, the Washington Supreme Court ruled on Sept. 3.

The complaint filed by the girls’ attorney claims Backpage.com “knowingly developed a nationwide online marketplace for illicit commercial sex” and “developed a reputation for itself as a website where pimps advertise commercial sex.”

A mother of one of the victims said a pimp found her daughter, placed an ad on Backpage, and sold her for sex within 36 hours of her leaving home. The pimp, 31-year-old Baruti Hopson, drove her daughter to seedy motels in several cities, where he sold her repeatedly. For more than three months, the distraught mother had no idea where her daughter was.

“I couldn’t drive anymore—just hysterical—you just don’t know,” she told Komo News.

Meanwhile, Backpage ads kept customers calling.

While Backpage claims to report possible sex-trafficking cases, Yiota Souras, a lawyer for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, said when parents report their daughters are being sold on Backpage, the company doesn’t always remove the ads.

Erik Bauer, a Tacoma-based attorney representing the victims, argued the nature of Backpage’s listings create a “volume business.” He said the girls were sold for sex up to 20 times per day. According to AIM group, a business consulting company, Backpage generated $23.9 million in revenue from adult ads in 2011. Since then, the company has gobbled up nearly 80 percent of the adult sex ad market.

When the three victims filed their Washington lawsuit, lawyers for Backpage asked the court to dismiss the case for frivolity, citing Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act.

But Bauer believes the company has misinterpreted the law.

“The rule is intended to protect big companies like Facebook, AOL, and Amazon when they get sued over third party content that is committed by their clients,” he said. “For example, if someone is slandered on Facebook, the slanderer is legally responsible, not Facebook. … The intent of the Communications Decency Act is not meant to open a blind alley for prostitution and child sex trafficking.”

But Backpage has successfully used the Communications Decency Act as a defense in the past. A judge in Boston dismissed a similar case brought by three young sex trafficking victims there who claimed Backpage “took various steps to sustain the impression” that the site is “a safe and effective vehicle for transactions involving young girls and boys.”

The company’s legal fortunes began to turn this summer, when Chicago Sheriff Thomas Dart asked major credit card companies to end their relationship with the embattled website’s adult ads section. When they complied, Backpage sued the sheriff and lost.

Jim Grant, a Seattle lawyer representing Backpage in the Washington case, insists holding the website responsible for users’ posts would chill free speech.

Bauer scoffed at that notion.

“How about, basic freedom for kids? How about freedom to live life happy and joyous?” he asked on ABC News. “Freedom of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are constitutional rights. These freedoms are more import than corporate freedom-of-speech rights.”

Despite its string of court victories up to this point, Bauer predicted the company can’t avoid responsibility forever.

“There are some weird legal decisions in our country, and so far they have enabled Backpage to exist and even thrive,” he said. “Blatant prostitution advertising is what they are, and Backpage takes a fee. I actually believe that Backpage’s days are numbered.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.