Salesforce Trafficking Lawsuit Tests Tech Accountability Limits

The landmark case G.G. v. Salesforce, with attorney Tommy Fibich on the plaintiff's legal team, is forcing courts to confront a critical question: when does providing business infrastructure to a known trafficking enterprise cross the line into active participation? This civil lawsuit, brought under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) by a survivor of child sex trafficking, does not accuse Salesforce of creating ads or directly trafficking children. Instead, it alleges the technology giant knowingly benefited from providing customized customer relationship management tools to the classifieds website Backpage, a platform whose adult services section was a notorious hub for sex trafficking. The case hinges on whether supplying backend business software that helped organize advertisers and track revenue constitutes actionable support for a criminal venture, even after the platform's role in child exploitation became widely known.

An Illinois federal court initially dismissed the case, but a split Seventh Circuit panel reversed that decision, allowing the lawsuit to proceed. The court's pivotal ruling differentiated between publishing speech—which is protected under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act—and providing services that allegedly helped a trafficking operation succeed. This legal distinction is central to the balance between long-standing free speech protections for technology companies and federal laws designed to combat sex trafficking. The lawsuit argues that when a company supplies tools that make sex trafficking possible, that support is active participation in a trafficking venture, not a neutral business relationship. The dissenting judges expressed concern that the ruling could broaden liability for companies doing business with bad actors, highlighting the high stakes of this precedent-setting litigation.

The case underscores the legal options available for survivors under the TVPA, which allows them to sue anyone who knowingly benefits from participation in a sex trafficking venture. Potential defendants can include business partners that facilitated operations, such as technology service providers. Fibich, Leebron, Copeland & Briggs, the firm representing the plaintiff, emphasizes that civil lawsuits like this not only seek compensation for survivors but also play a broader role by exposing systems that allow trafficking to persist. For more information on the legal framework, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act provides the statutory basis for such claims. Those affected can contact the firm to learn more about their civil legal options under state or federal law.