> When MindGeek decides to monetize child porn, and Visa decides to continue to allow its payment network to be used for that goal despite knowledge of MindGeek’s monetization of child porn, it is entirely foreseeable that victims of child porn like plaintiff will suffer the harms that plaintiff alleges

Isn't that on extremely flakey ground? Mindgeek is a legitimate business, they probably didn't "decide to monetize child porn" - they're based in Canada and that would mean jail time for a bunch of people from the company.

It's pretty sad that the whole legitimateporn industry, worldwide, is ruled based on what two US-based payment companies decide, and that is defined based on what they fear they might be sued for. It shouldn't be a free for all with child porn and bestiality and etc. but as long as all participants are consenting human adults, who cares and why?