The War on Porn Regular Updates about the Assault on The Adult Industry
Related Articles
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California ruled Tuesday that Aylo, the parent company of Pornhub.com, must continue defending claims brought under the California Invasion of Privacy Act, or CIPA, in a case centered on online tracking technologies and user data collection.
The decision, issued by U.S. District Judge Wesley Hsu of the Central District of California, stems from a proposed class action lawsuit alleging that Aylo used digital marketing tools that collected information tied to users’ pornography viewing habits, raising claims of privacy violations under California law.
Plaintiffs Scott Adair, Kent Henderson and Tarris Wallace filed suit against Aylo and several affiliated companies, including its Ireland-based entity, during the summer of 2025. The case was initially filed in Los Angeles Superior Court before Aylo transferred it to federal court in the Central District of California.
At the time the lawsuit was filed, the adult entertainment industry was alerted by the Free Speech Coalition to a growing number of legal complaints targeting adult platforms over the use of standard online marketing and analytics technologies. In this case, the plaintiffs argue that Aylo violated its own terms of service through the use of what the complaint describes as “third-party tracking technologies” on the Pornhub website.
The technologies referenced in the suit are widely used across digital publishing and advertising. They include Google Analytics as well as internal tracking systems developed by Aylo to collect user experience data and generate content recommendations.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs allege that the Aylo defendants:
…“intercept[ed], read and analyz[ed] a range of highly sensitive and identifying information, including (1) specific video titles a user has selected and played; (2) any sexual orientation categories navigated (e.g., transgender, gay, bisexual); (3) explicit and detailed scene-specific attributes of the videos (such as the presence of named pornographic performers, the production type like ‘amateur,’ ‘homemade’ or ‘doggy style,’ or whether the video was made in a specific country such as ‘Japan’); (4) any search terms entered by the user into the Pornhub Website search bar, including even sensitive queries like ‘Asian teen girl’ or ‘young black teens’; and (5) details about products viewed or purchased on the Website’s online shop, including item categories, names, and price.”
The plaintiffs argue that users may have been exposed simply by visiting the site. In a minutes order issued Tuesday, Hsu stated that no federal class action has yet been certified, but said the federal court remains the proper venue for the litigation.
“As to the reasonable expectation of privacy, [the] plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that users would reasonably expect [the] defendants not to track their highly sensitive private information related to Plaintiffs’ pornography viewing habits,” Hsu wrote. “Plaintiffs have also plausibly alleged that users would not expect Defendants to use that highly sensitive private information to build detailed profiles pertaining to users.”
The judge added, “Additionally, [the] plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that the alleged data collection plausibly defies social norms. … Plaintiffs have alleged that they did not consent to the alleged data collection. Without this consent, it is reasonable to infer [that the] Plaintiffs were unaware [and that] defendants were collecting data pertaining to Plaintiffs’ highly sensitive pornographic search terms and purchases.”
Under California’s privacy law, violations can involve intentionally recording or monitoring confidential communications without the consent of all parties involved. The statute also addresses the use of software or devices that intercept or track communications, including website interactions, without legally required disclosure or permission.
The plaintiffs contend that users were not sufficiently informed that their data could be tracked through marketing technologies such as Google Analytics. Under CIPA, alleged violations can carry financial penalties if proven in court.
