Girls do porn who made the allegations?
Executive summary
The allegations against GirlsDoPorn were made by scores of women who say they were tricked, coerced or forced into shooting explicit videos that were then published online without their informed consent; a core group of 22 plaintiffs brought a high‑profile civil suit that resulted in a multimillion‑dollar judgment, and many more women later joined lawsuits and complaints against the site and platforms that hosted its content [1] [2] [3].
1. Plaintiffs named in the original civil case — 22 women who said they were deceived and coerced
A group of 22 women filed a civil lawsuit alleging intentional misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, misappropriation of name and likeness, and deceptive business practices, asserting they were lured to San Diego under false pretenses, hurried into signing confusing releases, and told the footage would not be posted online—claims that led a judge to award nearly $13 million to the plaintiffs in January 2020 [2] [1].
2. Dozens more joined later suits — expanding the list of alleged victims into the dozens and beyond
After the 22‑plaintiff verdict, more women emerged as plaintiffs in subsequent lawsuits and mass actions: groups of 50, 60 and even additional individual Jane Does joined suits against Pornhub’s parent company (later Aylo/MindGeek), alleging the platform hosted GirlsDoPorn videos despite notices and knowledge of the producers’ coercive practices [4] [3] [5].
3. High‑profile individual allegations — former pageant contestant Kristy Althaus and others
Some plaintiffs went public with detailed accusations; for example, Kristy Althaus, a former pageant runner‑up, alleged in her complaint that she was raped and forced to film for GirlsDoPorn and that Pratt and associates used threats, alcohol, pills and even a gun to coerce participation—claims reported in litigation filings and media coverage [6].
4. What the plaintiffs described: consistent patterns of recruitment, deception and online exposure
Across the lawsuits and FBI filings, the women described a recurring playbook: online ads with no mention of pornography, “reference” models who falsely reassured recruits, contracts presented only after arrival that omitted the GirlsDoPorn name, promises that footage would be burned to DVDs for overseas collectors rather than posted online, and then widespread online publication followed by doxxing and harassment—facts cited in the federal probe and in court rulings supporting the plaintiffs’ accounts [7] [1] [2].
5. Alternative perspectives, corporate responses and legal results that contextualize the allegations
Defendants have not uniformly conceded every factual claim—some operators initially pleaded not guilty and litigation produced contested testimony and legal maneuvering [8]; platforms like MindGeek/Aylo argued they were not responsible for third‑party uploads while ultimately reaching settlements and a deferred prosecution agreement acknowledging they accepted funds that “originated from” trafficking‑related activity [9] [5]. Federal prosecutors pursued criminal charges that described the same coercive conduct alleged by plaintiffs, and several co‑conspirators pleaded guilty or were convicted, providing prosecutorial corroboration of numerous victim accounts [7] [8].
6. Conclusion — who “made the allegations”?
The allegations were made collectively by the women who appeared in the GirlsDoPorn productions—initially the 22 plaintiffs who took their case to trial and won a judgment, then many more who filed subsequent suits and complaints; their claims have been echoed in federal indictments, individual complaints such as Kristy Althaus’s, and mass litigation against platforms that hosted the videos [2] [1] [3] [6].