General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Independent: Pornhub ban now covers more than a third of US states [View all]AZJonnie
(106 posts)More likely, in my reckoning, is that the lawmakers in the state wanted the porn companies (esp. the 'free' ones like pronhub and xnxx) out of the state, and crafted the laws in such a way that they knew this would be the outcome, without having to obviously violate the 1A.
And I'd wager their primary lever to accomplish this was by creating new liability issues that are either explicitly onerous, or leave unanswered questions about liability scope, such as: Who's allowed to sue, under what conditions, and where does the burden of proof lie? How much can be awarded to a plaintiff? Could any such laws make the sites ownership criminally liable for a minor accessing the site?
Lastly, I don't think minors spend much money (relative to adults) on porn purchases, or chaturbate, or sex toys, or male enhancement, the sales of which are what the free 'hubs' are about. Their free porn clips are a 'loss leader', and I'd bet your average minor that visits these sites is a 'money-loser' for them. I'd also bet that if these sites could eliminate minors usage thereof, without it costing them money for age verification services for everyone ELSE, and absent any liabilities for the failure of their system to do so perfectly at all times, every one of them would sign up for that.
That's my humble assessment, for what it's worth.