US porn makers are being sued for $22m (£17.5m) over allegations that they lied and coerced a group of young women into making “amateur-style” pornographic films.

In court this week, a woman known as Jane Doe 1 described how the humiliation led to her abandoning her career in law and drove her to two suicide attempts.

After details of the women were published on WikiPorn, with social media and in-depth personal information, a campaign of anonymous harassment began that included the films being sent to their friends and family.

Since 19 August the San Diego superior court has been hearing evidence from the women, Jane Doe 1 and 21 others. The women argue that their lives were “destroyed” after the San Diego business GirlsDoPorn released the films online – the women say the company promised the films would only be seen anonymously on specialist DVDS.

GirlsDoPorn is an adult subscription services launched in 2006 by New Zealander Michael Pratt. Filmed in homes and hotels and caravan parks, videos on GirlsDoPorn push the image of the “ordinary” college girl who is making her first and only pornographic film.

At the heart of the case is the women’s claim that they were pressured into making the film with threats and lies. They say they were told that the footage would go straight to DVD for wealthy buyers in other countries, in particular Australia and New Zealand, where the defendants come from. They say the defendants promised them that they would never go online or be sold anywhere in the US.

The videos were in fact uploaded to some of the most used porn sites in the world and have been seen more than a billion times.

The girls claim that anonymous emails were sent to their families, universities and friends, linking them to the videos. The women told the court that they believe the defendants are linked to the posting of personal information, though this is disputed.

The case names three defendants and the legal entities they operate.

The named three are Michael Pratt, the chief executive of GirlsDoPorn.com; Andre Garcia, an actor; and Matthew Wolfe, a videographer. Their lawyers said they would show that the women signed contracts that said the videos they made could be “used anywhere, anyhow, for any purpose”.

The women also recorded videotaped statements to say they were not under the influence of drugs or mind-altering substances, and that they consented to the videos being used in any way, according to court documents.

“In our view, the women’s regret over their decision to make pornographic videos was and remains the primary motivation for this lawsuit,” Aaron Sadock, a lawyer, wrote in an email.

The women dispute that the contracts were signed fairly and in proper understanding of what would happen to the films they made.

They had replied to ads on Craigslist asking for “beautiful college-type preppy girls” aged 18 to 22 and interested in modelling.

The plaintiffs claimed that after applying for modelling work on Craigslist, they received phone calls from women who have been described as a key part of the business – “reference women” who pitched the idea of making porn and allegedly assured them that it would never go online.

The plaintiffs alleged the recruiters laid out a false trail of information about distribution, which lawyers said was part of a deliberately dishonest business model.

The defendants allegedly told the women that they were an Australian company and the videos would only be sold on DVD outside the US. Instead, lawyers argued, the entire business model of GirlsDoPorn relied on online publication of pornographic films.

It is alleged that “reference women” were paid by GirlsDoPorn to contact the women by phone, text and FaceTime. These women assured prospective models that they themselves had made videos with GirlsDoPorn that never went online. They promised the women they would remain anonymous.

Arriving in San Diego, the women were taken to apartments or hotel rooms where they said they were “graded” on their attractiveness. The women said that the agreed pay was then reduced based on this ranking.

Even though they were underage, they were given alcohol – enough, Jane Doe 1 said, to get her drunk.

In his opening statement, lawyer Edward Chapin told the court: “Having flown across the country, alone in a hotel room with at least two men who controlled their return flight, [the young women] felt they had no choice but to accept the lower figure.”

Giving evidence earlier, Jane Doe 15 said: “If I had known that they were posting it on the internet, that my name would be attached to it, that it would be [distributed] in the United States, if I had known that it was more than 30 minutes of filming – if I had known any of that, just any one of those, I wouldn’t have done it.”

A month or two after filming, the videos went up online, not just on GirlsDoPorn but on many other hugely popular porn sites. Almost immediately, the young women say they started getting calls from their friends and families telling them they had just been sent a link of them having sex. One of the allegations being disputed in court is whether these malicious emails came from the defendants.

The women claimed that links to the free clips of the videos on Pornhub and other free websites were sent to their high school and college classmates, friends, sororities, professors, parents, brothers, church members and any other person in their lives.

‘I felt ripped apart, piece by piece’

All this week Jane Doe 1, a former law student and successful athlete, gave evidence about the enormous impact she alleges the online publication and subsequent WikiPorn leak have had on her life.

So severe was the impact of the films that she told the court she has had plastic surgery to try to create a new, unrecognisable face.

“I’ve gotten cheek fillers to try and change the structure of my face and microbladed my eyebrows to try and change my appearance,” she said.

At one point, the judge asked her if she needed a break from talking, as she described holding a loaded gun and thinking about ending her life.

“I shake, I throw up from anxiety. I am on four different pills a day for anxiety. In law school I couldn’t focus.”

In November 2015 there were 60 emails and phone calls left trying to get her expelled. The emails bringing up her porn film went to the dean of the law school, and to the head of the student body with links to the video.

“I felt ripped apart, piece by piece. Honestly I wanted to commit suicide when it all came out … I tried moving away. I have tried going places people don’t know me and it just follows me everywhere.

“I’m always paranoid when I meet new people that they have seen my video or [when I] meet new people [they] are going to say, ‘I know you.’”

Her life, she says, is irrevocably changed, including the end of her hopes of a legal career.

“I do not want a career as an attorney. My name is completely destroyed.”

The case is expected to last another month.