this is scary....

[DavidIsCrazy]

got this off twitter

nasty site apparertly with no real contacts

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/....html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003&ir=Weird News

 

[curvyredhead]

wow, just wow

 

[AllisonWilder]

Such a sleazy fucking site.

I wonder if a site like MFC could get info taken down with a DMCA if this happened to a camgirl.

 

[MyCamgirl]

With this particular site DMCA wouldn't be valid because the site is hosted outside US and also because DMCA does not cover private information. It would depend on the site's collaboration.

If someone wishes to be removed from the site, they are asked to pay a one-time fee of $99.95.

And this is how much costs their collaboration. Yep, it's an extortion scheme.

Unfortunately, the Cyber Privacy Act was not approved. The person would have to use a different legal tool to have it removed.

One guy had already created a site similar to this one, but showing info gathered from digital documents posted online by courts. Same thing... "give me money to remove your criminal record". It took only one person to sue the site to make the guy drop his cyber extortion project. I can't find a link to quote.

 

[TashaDutch]

atleast some people, making these disgusting sites come out in the open
its beyond retarded and cowardness to make a site to expose people like that, and then stay anonymous yourself...
WTF.. i hope they get their lawsuit soon!

 

[Jessi J]

Apparently though, they are hiding behind the same law that Hunter Moore is (I dunno why so many cam girls/regular girls like him) to protect them from being responsible for any content being uploaded.

They make YOU say the information is true/legal/18+ etc and say that they are not responsible for any content uploaded to their website.

Nice, huh?

 

[bob]

Apparently though, they are hiding behind the same law that Hunter Moore is (I dunno why so many cam girls/regular girls like him) to protect them from being responsible for any content being uploaded.

They make YOU say the information is true/legal/18+ etc and say that they are not responsible for any content uploaded to their website.

Nice, huh?

yep....and legally, they seem to have found the loophole they needed in the "community decency act"
what i don't understand, tho, is how they can legally claim on their site that these woman are "convicted prostitutes"

that seems flat out libelous, and worthy of a bucket full of settlement expenses

 

[Shaun__]

Apparently though, they are hiding behind the same law that Hunter Moore is (I dunno why so many cam girls/regular girls like him) to protect them from being responsible for any content being uploaded.

They make YOU say the information is true/legal/18+ etc and say that they are not responsible for any content uploaded to their website.

Nice, huh?

yep....and legally, they seem to have found the loophole they needed in the "community decency act"
what i don't understand, tho, is how they can legally claim on their site that these woman are "convicted prostitutes"

that seems flat out libelous, and worthy of a bucket full of settlement expenses

The users claim they are prostitutes not the site. They use that to try to shield themselves from lawsuits.

 

[bob]

Apparently though, they are hiding behind the same law that Hunter Moore is (I dunno why so many cam girls/regular girls like him) to protect them from being responsible for any content being uploaded.

They make YOU say the information is true/legal/18+ etc and say that they are not responsible for any content uploaded to their website.

Nice, huh?

yep....and legally, they seem to have found the loophole they needed in the "community decency act"
what i don't understand, tho, is how they can legally claim on their site that these woman are "convicted prostitutes"

that seems flat out libelous, and worthy of a bucket full of settlement expenses

The users claim they are prostitutes not the site. They use that to try to shield themselves from lawsuits.

nope....their "how we work" section states clearly that anybody is free to submit the contact info of any "potential prostitute"
it's the site itself that ups the wording to "convicted prostitute"
i can't imagine the legal arguement that would allow them to use that wording and remain libel free.

 

[Shaun__]

nope....their "how we work" section states clearly that anybody is free to submit the contact info of any "potential prostitute"
it's the site itself that ups the wording to "convicted prostitute"
i can't imagine the legal arguement that would allow them to use that wording and remain libel free.

They are not saying the people listed are convicted prostitutes. They are saying the women in the rotating picture mug shot carrousel wearing prison garb are convicted prostitutes. You did what they hoped you would and linked the two unrelated things. It is still extortion of course in my opinion.

 

[Rebecca Buck]

Because if there's one thing we need to protect the world from, it's prostitutes.

I've seen a couple other sites similar to this before, where I live they have giant billboards near the airport for "cheaterville.com" and "bullyville.com", and a client of ours where I work had his girlfriend posted up on some sight that was something like "slutwatch" or something... Same thing, her picture, phone number, and facebook profile were linked there, and she had to pay 50 bucks to have it taken down. Fucking sick.

 

[bob]

nope....their "how we work" section states clearly that anybody is free to submit the contact info of any "potential prostitute"
it's the site itself that ups the wording to "convicted prostitute"
i can't imagine the legal arguement that would allow them to use that wording and remain libel free.

They are not saying the people listed are convicted prostitutes. They are saying the women in the rotating picture mug shot carrousel wearing prison garb are convicted prostitutes. You did what they hoped you would and linked the two unrelated things. It is still extortion of course in my opinion.

i'm not seeing it, unless this site has created a lot of "user content" shaun in the effort to create some credibility
here's three photos from the scrolling list of the "convicts"


and here they are in the profiles section....the defacto classfication for that section is "potential"


it's the site who creates that relationship between unrelated things, and its far more calculated than just assuming that most users will making an association between two unrelated things.

 

[Alexandra Cole]

If their purported mission is protect us from the whores of the world, it needs to be flooded with politicians, starting with the anti-choice, pro-vaginal probe panderers.

 

[mynameisbob84]

Surely this is just gonna become a prostitute directory for people who want to hire a prostitute.

 

[Shaun__]

i'm not seeing it, unless this site has created a lot of "user content" shaun in the effort to create some credibility
here's three photos from the scrolling list of the "convicts"


and here they are in the profiles section....the defacto classfication for that section is "potential"


it's the site who creates that relationship between unrelated things, and its far more calculated than just assuming that most users will making an association between two unrelated things.

I never said the site was not run by scummy people, just that the people under the convicted prostitute label are all wearing prison or jail garb against the same backdrop. They are all also on the potential prostitute list, and based on their outfits the site was probably safe putting them there. The actual profiles never say anyone has been convicted or charged with any crime. This site is pretending to be legal, and will unfortunately stay up for way to long. Politicians are slow to stop things that do not bother them personally. If one of their daughters or their wife shows up on the site they may do something.

 

[bob]

I never said the site was not run by scummy people, just that the people under the convicted prostitute label are all wearing prison or jail garb against the same backdrop. They are all also on the potential prostitute list, and based on their outfits the site was probably safe putting them there. The actual profiles never say anyone has been convicted or charged with any crime. This site is pretending to be legal, and will unfortunately stay up for way to long. Politicians are slow to stop things that do not bother them personally. If one of their daughters or their wife shows up on the site they may do something.

ok...i agree with the first part, and your speculation in the last part is unfortunately, a political truth.

This site is pretending to be legal.....

exactly....and it looks like that "Community Decency Act" provides them one legal leg to stand on.....but once you are convicted of prostitution.....you are no longer a "potential prostitute".....

it's semantic....i understand that.....but libel and slander are often the result of innuendo and quilt by association.

i guess i'm asking a legal question, because i don't understand why it's not libel to post some random women up on the same list with convicted prostitutes......assuming you're correct

 

[Shaun__]

I never said the site was not run by scummy people, just that the people under the convicted prostitute label are all wearing prison or jail garb against the same backdrop. They are all also on the potential prostitute list, and based on their outfits the site was probably safe putting them there. The actual profiles never say anyone has been convicted or charged with any crime. This site is pretending to be legal, and will unfortunately stay up for way to long. Politicians are slow to stop things that do not bother them personally. If one of their daughters or their wife shows up on the site they may do something.

ok...i agree with the first part, and your speculation in the last part is unfortunately, a political truth.

This site is pretending to be legal.....

exactly....and it looks like that "Community Decency Act" provides them one legal leg to stand on.....but once you are convicted of prostitution.....you are no longer a "potential prostitute".....

it's semantic....i understand that.....but libel and slander are often the result of innuendo and quilt by association.

i guess i'm asking a legal question, because i don't understand why it's not libel to post some random women up on the same list with convicted prostitutes......assuming you're correct

I think it is libel to say someone is a prostitute, but the site is claiming users are submitting the information and saying they cannot check everything. They then extort the fee to be removed from the list, and claim it is to recoup the cost of manually altering their data. I can not prove the site is actually breaking any laws to be honest, but I suspect that some of the falsely submitted women were done by them.

 

[Nordling]

Extortion is illegal, not to mention some of the new anti-bullying laws. I do hope they stumble in their attempts to obfuscate their real intention. I'd love to see the site owners go to prison on racketeering charges or more.