This is my opinion on the matter of Pounced.org being suddenly shut down. This is MY opinion, based on MY perspective and what I have witnessed and done. Your views are irrelevant, your comments are not welcome nor allowed. You may read, and you may opine to yourself. I don't care what you think. This is my analysis based on my many years of legal experience including dealing with and interpreting federal laws such as these.

This analysis was emailed to Pounced via their official email account which is still functional. I stated that I am posting this information and that they are welcome to comment, and that I would repost based on any comments they provide. I have so far heard nothing. The analysis is attached as a Word document, but is also included as text in this comment text, below.



Pounced.org suddenly shut their website yesterday and pointed to FOSTA (via the EFF website) as their reason for suddenly and without notice shutting down, providing only a link to an EFF (Electronic Freedom Frontier I believe, a lobbying organization which in this instance is opposed to FOSTA on the basis that it makes sex workers unsafe, the chief complaint about this law, a law that was not yet passed as of the date Pounced was shut down. The nature of how the website was shut down, the fact that no one was notified ahead of time, and especially the fact that the prevailing law cited as the reason for shutting down the site was not even law yet as it had not been sent to Trump for signing into law.

But, an analysis of the law, which is STILL PENDING and thus has NOT been enacted, demonstrates that Pounced.org has no reason to take their website down, UNLESS they have already been engaged in illegal activity and they were made aware of this, likely by authorities who pointed to this new law as a means by which Wolfpac, who administers the site for Kelar, the owner and creator, can be prosecuted for his crimes which have already been committed on the site.

My personal opinion is that this shutdown was because Wolfpac was contacted by the District Attorney of Orange County, Florida, where Wolfpac resides, as a result of my contacting the Orlando Police Department, three media outlets, the Orange County District Attorney, and the FBI, related to numerous minors who have been caught using the site and which Wolfpac did nothing about because he wanted irrefutable proof that they were minors. I also sent them a copy of Wolfpac's ad, which included his link to his Xtube account, as well as his "popgoestheknot" twitter account. I indicated that I have complained numerous times and have made extensive efforts to prevent minors from using the site. I also sent them a copy of a recent ad in which a user admitted being 13.

In this specific incident, a minor placed an ad and included their messenger contact and listed their age as 18. I contacted this person via their messenger and initiated a conversation. The conversation ended when I asked him to confirm his age. He later changed his age from 18 to 20 on Pounced. I submitted a report on the ad, related what exactly happened. The response was for Wolfpac to ask me to send him evidence that the person stated they were under 18. I forwarded that email, a link to the ad in question, and a link to Wolfpac's ad to the Orlando PD. When this was returned, I then forwarded it with the message telling me Orlando PD's email rejected my message to three media outlets in Orlando, the DA of Orange County, and then I called the FBI in Florida and left a message indicating the facts of the situation and also commented that I have dealt with this same issue of minors using the site on numerous previous occasions. I did this about a month or two ago.


Why do I believe this is the case, why did I turn Pounced and specifically Wolfpac in for exploiting minors?

Simple: the laws which FOSTA changes, have already been broken by Pounced.org in that Pounced.org, Kelar, and Wolfpac, have not done nearly enough to prevent sexual exploitation of minors. Pounced already has an established history of facilitating the exploitation of minors, including the Pandaguy (?) incident in Pennsylvania, as well as the woman in Colorado Springs. I myself have contacted the authorities on numerous occasions related to minors using the site and Pounced not doing anything about it and especially not doing nearly enough to exclude minors. Pounced has a history that does in fact include the sexual exploitation of minors.

As it turns out, they are required by law, a law already on the books and which is being strengthened by FOSTA, which requires that sites which provide adult content MUST provide a means to users to block content for minors, and also states that the site must take reasonable precautions and actions to prevent and otherwise exclude minors from using the site.

So, when I contacted, for the first time, the Orlando PD and Orange County DA, I also contacted the news organizations to be sure that something was done about the exploitation of minors, the use of Pounced by minors, as a priority, given that there are obviously so many minors using Pounced (an examination of their own user statistics shows undeniably that there are far too many 18 year olds for the site's demographics which strongly indicates minors are not only using the site, but that there are a significant number of accounts held by minors.)

Read the analysis and see for yourself. Don't just believe me. After all, this is all just my opinion. I don't know for sure why Pounced was shut down, but I do know that we are being lied to, and that how it was taken down was quite rude. If it was in fact about that law, there would have been discussion before taking the site down, or there would have been warning. There was not. The site was just taken down, and a brief message with a link put up on the site's main page (most of us who bookmarked the entry page got a 404 error) and a similar brief comment on the Twitter feed.) The law cited as the reason for taking the site down has absolutley no bearing on Pounced, unless Pounced is already violating the laws that FOSTA changes.

Let me emphasize this, according to my analysis of the law, there is absolutely no reason for Pounced to have taken down their website, especially based on a law cited which was not even a law at the time the site was taken down. The reasons are unclear, and the excuse is unsupported by the facts. Pounced was taken down because it was already guilty.

Why did I take the action I did against Pounced?

Because it is my legal responsibility under the law that if I witness exploitation of minors, that I notify the appropriate authorities. If I do not, I am otherwise a party to the exploitation. This is called an Affirmative Defense. So those of you who would criticize me for "getting Pounced shut down" should instead be thanking me for doing my duty and realize that you are a party to Pounced exploiting minors if you have an account or otherwise use the site and did not report the accounts of minors you witnessed using the site.


Pounced.org, Kelar, and Wolfpac owe their users an explanation which includes the facts, told completely and in truth. Pounced.org users deserve to know why their accounts were suddenly shut down. Pounced.org users also should know that Pounced shuts down the accounts of anyone who complains about the site's history of not serving people.




Text of my analysis:
Analysis of FOSTA as it applies to Pounced:

Text of bill:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th.....bill/1865/text

Defined as an act:
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to clarify that section 230 of such Act does not prohibit the enforcement against providers and users of interactive computer services of Federal and State criminal and civil law relating to sexual exploitation of children or sex trafficking, and for other purposes.

Section 1 – Short Title:
Self explanatory, just the name of the act.

Section 2 – Sense of Congress
Basically, this section states that Congress is concerned and acting up their concern that website which promote prostitution are doing so in a manner which does not prevent trafficking of adults and exploitation and trafficking of minors

Section 3 – Promotion of Prostitution and Reckless Disregard for Sex Trafficking

This section amends 18 USC 2421 “Transportation Generally” which defines sex trafficking as the physical transport of prostitutes or victims of sexual exploitation across state lines for the purpose of sexual exploitation or prostitution, to add use of websites in lieu of physical transportation if those sites are specifically for prostution, REGARDLESS OF ITS GLOBAL LOCATION if it is viewable by and affects US citizens.

It also states that a violation is “aggreived” (more strongly intended to be in violation of the law), that is, if the website promotes prostitution of more than five people or involves violations of forced coercion or exploitation of minors, that there are stiff penalties including civil recovery (lawsuits), mandatory restitution, and up to 25 years in jail. It also states that if prostitution in the jurisdiction in which the website is operated is legal, that there is what is called an “affirmative defense” which basically means one doesn't know what one is doing is illegal (in this case, in the USA where prostitution is not legal.)

The basics of this section are that creators and maintainers of prostitution websites and websites which by any means facilitate the exploitation of minors, can be prosecuted under US law regardless of their location in the world IF they are forcing people into prostitution or by any means allowing the exploitation of minors.

Section 4: Ensuring the ability to prosecute sex trafficking and sexual exploitation of minors

This is what everyone is worried about, wrongfully so for most, rightfully so for Pounced admins. This section states that the act amends 18 USC 230 to add that this law has no effect on 18 USC 1591, 18 USC 1595 or 18 USC 2421; each of which state that people involved in trafficking or exploitation of minors, that is, those who operate, own, or administer websites which facilitate the exploitation of minors or forced prostitution of adults, can be prosecuted as traffickers or as facilitating the exploitation of minors.

It basically states that websites which promote prostitution through forced means (sex trafficking) are fully liable for the actions of their users. It also says that if a website is facilitating the exploitation of minors, that the owners and operators can be held liable both criminally and civilly. And yes, Pounced DOES have to worry about this because they are in fact guilty under already-existing law which states that websites must act to prevent minors from accessing adult content and protect them from being exploited or trafficked (which includes engaging in any sex act which has ANY form of value attached to it, including “favors.”) In other words, by not preventing minors from using Pounced, and because they have no mechanism to warn people that minors could be using the site, and because they do not provide means by which parents can know how to block the content of Pounced, that Pounced owners and admins are legally liable for any exploitation of minors.

Section 5: Ensuring federal liability
Simply makes it a federal crime by adding text to the law which so states.

Section 6: Actions by State Attorneys General
Amends 18 USC 1595 as follows: - it is IMPORTANT to read this with regards to Pounced:

“(d) In any case in which the attorney general of a State has reason to believe that an interest of the residents of that State has been or is threatened or adversely affected by any person who violates section 1591, the attorney general of the State, as parens patriae, may bring a civil action against such person on behalf of the residents of the State in an appropriate district court of the United States to obtain appropriate relief.”

Basically, it says that if an Attorney General of a state has reason to believe minors are being exploited, they should initiate as a defacto representative of children being exploited, a lawsuit against the offenders (website owners and administrators.)

Section 7: Savings Clause
Basic and routine, states that the law doesn't affect the ability of other laws to cause prosecution.

Section 8: GAO Study
Simply commissions a study a few years down the road to examine the results. Irrelevant to the discussion.


Summary:

There is nothing in this law which does anything to cause Pounced to shut down. This law changes nothing in that regard, EXCEPT that it allows the administrators as well as the owner to be prosecuted criminally on a federal level for the exploitation of minors that is already happening.

In other words, Pounced was not shut down because of this law, it was shut down because someone cited this law as a means by which the administrators of the website can also be prosecuted for the crimes already being committed by the owner of the site. These crimes are 100% related to minors using Pounced, the failure of Pounced administrators to prevent minors from using the site, and their failure to remove suspected minors and minors who are accessing the site.

So the question is, why did Pounced take the site down?

The answer: Because they were turned in for trafficking minors recently.