pleenk
enfrespt
Book a demo
← Blog
pt-brfresende

Human trafficking and cam studios: what a live streaming platform must check

Published 9 November 20268 min readBy Pleenk Approve

Human trafficking and cam studios: what a live streaming platform must check

A new broadcaster signs up on your live streaming platform. Her ID goes through, her account goes live, the first tips come in. On your screen, everything looks normal. But who is in the room with her? And who keeps the money at the end of the month?

These questions are not theoretical. In Colombia, several recent investigations target clandestine cam studios suspected of human trafficking. The alleged victims were broadcasting on international platforms.

The short answer: you cannot see the studio, but you can see its traces. Your platform needs to know who is on camera, who controls the account and who receives the money. It also needs to be able to prove this to its PSP (the payment provider that lets it accept card payments).

What happened in Colombia?

On 10 October 2026, the Colombian press reported a case in Villa del Rosario, near the border with Venezuela. According to Colombian prosecutors, a house served as a clandestine studio from August to October 2025. A 19-year-old woman and a 16-year-old girl were allegedly exploited there.

The alleged organisers are said to have set the working hours and fined the broadcasters. They also allegedly received the dollar payments from the platforms themselves. Three people face charges, including aggravated human trafficking. They deny the allegations and have been placed in pre-trial detention. The courts have not yet ruled on the case.

This case is not isolated. In late December 2025, in Cúcuta, police arrested a man suspected of exploiting Venezuelan teenagers in a studio. Police say they seized four fake identity cards. According to investigators, these documents were allegedly used to register minors as adults on websites.

The pattern goes beyond Colombia. In May 2026, Interpol ran an online operation with police officers from seven countries. They identified 34 suspicious cases and 27 potential victims online, including on subscription platforms. Interpol describes fake modelling agencies that lure victims. These agencies then take over the account and keep most of the earnings.

Why is this your problem, even far from Colombia?

A studio can broadcast anywhere in the world. Your platform could be hosting an abusive studio without knowing it.

In late 2024, Human Rights Watch published testimony from workers in the Colombian industry. According to them, studios keep up to 70% of what the platform pays them. The studio often creates the model's account itself. Of 50 models interviewed, 49 had never seen or signed the platform's terms of service. The NGO calls on platforms to let each person own their account.

The law is also getting tougher, especially for the perpetrators:

  • In the European Union, Directive 2024/1712 on human trafficking had to be transposed by 15 July 2026. When an offender uses digital technology to spread sexual images of a victim, this is an aggravating circumstance.
  • In France, the National Assembly adopted the "loi intégrale" on sexual and gender-based violence on 13 October 2026. Its Article 25 creates an offence of online sexual exploitation, punishable by 7 years in prison and a €150,000 fine. It covers, among other things, recruiting a person through threats, coercion or abuse of their vulnerability. The Senate is expected to examine the bill in January.
  • In Colombia, several bills on the sector have been filed since 2021. We found no trace of an adopted law to date.

The French bill does not directly target platforms: MPs dropped a version that would have exposed them to pimping charges. But your PSP does not think only in terms of criminal law. Since 2021, Mastercard has required documented age and identity verification of every person who uploads or appears. According to the payment provider Corepay, these rules also require live streams to be monitored in real time. For a bank, a single trafficking case linked to your platform may be enough to put everything in question.

Who is really on camera?

A verified account does not tell you who is broadcasting tonight. A studio can get an adult verified, then put a minor in front of the camera. It can also present a fake ID, as investigators suspect in Cúcuta.

A simple photo of a document is therefore not enough. You need to check that a real person is in front of the camera: this is the liveness check. You then need to compare their face with the ID. No check is perfect, but this one makes substitution much harder.

Your moderators also need to know what to do when the face on screen does not seem to match the account. The same applies to a person who walks into the shot. Write the procedure down: who decides, how fast, and on what signal the live stream is cut. If someone regularly appears next to the broadcaster, that person must be verified too.

Who controls the account?

In an exploitation situation, the person on screen often has no control over their account. They do not know the password or your platform's rules.

Some signals therefore deserve a question:

  • several broadcasters connecting from the same device or address;
  • very long hours, with no days off;
  • an email address or password changed just before a payout;
  • an account that belongs to one person but shows another person on camera.

None of these signals proves exploitation. A studio can also operate legally and treat its models with respect. Each signal simply justifies a check, and a record of the decision.

We covered this topic for creators in our article on agencies that run accounts. For live streaming, we would add one rule: the studio must have a clear status on your platform. If it works on your platform, it is identified and verified, like an agency. It is never invisible behind a broadcaster's account.

Who gets the money?

This is the strongest signal. In Villa del Rosario, according to prosecutors, the money from the platforms went directly to the alleged organisers. The broadcasters reportedly received only a percentage.

Our starting rule would be simple: a broadcaster's earnings go to an account in her own name. A single bank account receiving money for several broadcasters should trigger a check. So should a change of bank account.

If your model involves paying studios, make it a controlled exception. Identify the studio and verify every person linked to it. Also check that each of them has agreed to this payment method. Our page on fighting human trafficking details the evidence a PSP expects.

What we would do if we ran a live streaming platform tomorrow

Write the status of studios into your terms of service. The EU's Digital Services Act (DSA) requires clear terms. They must be applied objectively and proportionately (Article 14). Say who can manage an account, and what is prohibited.

Talk directly to each broadcaster. Send the rules and payout information to her personal address. Not to the studio's.

Open a discreet reporting channel, in her language. A person under pressure will not write to general support. The DSA already requires an easy-to-access reporting mechanism (Article 16). Think about reports from viewers too.

Prepare your response before the problem. If a serious signal comes in, do not alert the studio: the person remains at risk. Cut the live stream, keep the evidence, call your lawyer and contact the competent authorities.

Ban the identity, not the username. An excluded studio that comes back under another name has lost nothing.

Keep a record of every decision. Who was verified, which payout was blocked, and why. The day your PSP asks, you can answer in minutes.

How Pleenk Approve can help

The core of Pleenk is a single digital identity. Every broadcaster, co-performer, agency or affiliate is verified with a liveness check. Their identity is encrypted by Pleenk and stored in a single wallet, a digital identity wallet. The platform receives a proof, never the ID document. Everything is linked to this wallet: their accounts, their consents, the bank account that receives their earnings and any bans. Pleenk compares the verified identity with the bank account: a third party cannot collect a broadcaster's earnings. A ban is tied to the identity, not to the account. Your live moderation stays your own: Pleenk connects to your moderation tool and keeps proof that the checks were done. From Pleenk, you automatically generate your report and share it with your PSP in one click.

Do you run a live streaming platform and want to know who really gets the money? Write to us at contact@pleenk.com and we will look at your situation with you.

This article is for information only and does not constitute legal advice. The Colombian cases mentioned are ongoing: the people charged are presumed innocent. The French bill has not been definitively adopted. Have your choices reviewed by your lawyer and your payment partners.

Sources

More articles
6 November 2026 · 7 min read
Ofcom is investigating two adult services over non-consensual intimate images: what a PSP should ask its merchants
4 November 2026 · 7 min read
When an agency runs a creator's account: what your platform needs to control
2 November 2026 · 8 min read
The regulator asks for your moderation figures: could you answer within 15 days?