Teen Sues MySpace Over Sexual Assault 979
kaufmanmoore writes "A 14-year old is suing myspace for $30 million claiming the site failed to protect her from a 19-year old she met through the site. The suit claims that MySpace doesn't verify a user's identity or age and doesn't do enough to protect users."
What they need. (Score:5, Funny)
How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
For the sake of humanity she really must lose the lawsuit.
The internet is a wonderful social tool. It brings people closer. Including the people you don't want to be close to. Once upon a time in order to find a variety of people I had to travel many miles from my parents suburban home to find such culture and people. Today I can find all the culture I can stand in about 30 seconds and three clicks. Good and Bad people abound both on the internet and off. There are things such as "dark alleys" on the internet too. And just like it's the responsibility of the parents to keep our 14 year old daughters from roaming alleys and talking to predatory individuals, it's also our responsibility to keep them off the alleys and steer them away from certain areas on the internet. Where was Mom and Dad when the minor went on a date with a 19 year old? MySpace is not a surrogate parent or baby sitter and makes no claims to be.
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Interesting)
He was 19 years old. He told her, instead, that he was a high school senior. High school seniors are usually around 18 years old. So the 14-year-old girl went out with a guy she thought was around 18, but it turned out he was actually 19.
If only she had known ahead of time... Damn you MySpace! Damn you!
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Informative)
Verifying age solely on-line is darn near impossible
A possible, but expensive, way MySpace could reliably verify age of new users is to open staffed registration centers (could be small staffed kiosks in malls, superstores, etc) throughout the U.S. and other various countries, in which new users would appear in person with a government photo ID / birth certificate, etc in hand along with a parent / guardian, if under the age of majority (gets a bit tricky, since "majority" can defined as something other than 18 in some jurisdictions; age 21 often works when in doubt)...
Bottom line is that verifying age solely on-line is a near impossibility - to do so reliably requires some form of off-line verification procedure, which will require much resources and money to do
A simplier answer is for parents to take responsibility and be more aware of what their children do; educate kids so they make smarter, more informed choices about how they conduct themselves.
Ron
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Informative)
eID [belgium.be]. Nearly every Belgian has one.
Just pop it into your cardreader, enter your PIN-code and your age is verified.
Oh it also has digital signing and other neat gizmo's
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
Man, you people are paranoid. WTH is wrong with a country requiring their citizens to carry an ID with them all the time? I've had mine since I was 12, and only *one* time did somebody require me to show it to them. That person was a cop, giving me a ticket for a traffic violation. It serves the same purpose as a drivers license: to allow the police to identify you when you commit a violation or a crime. The only reason he asked for my ID and not my drivers license was because I comitted the traffic violation by bike. If I were driving a car, he would have just asked for my drivers licence.
Other than that, the ID only leaves my wallet to show my dorky picture to friends. Now, what does it matter if the information is written on the thing, embedded in a chip, or both? None whatsoever. But hey, as soon as identities and electronics meet, armageddon must be near, right?
The positive benefits of an ID are stuff like ease of identification when I'm found dead, or badly hurt somewhere, so they can contact my immediate family; police knowing who I am when they arrest me for comitting a crime; age verification towards merchants who may not sell certain products to minors etc...
The downsides? I can only think of one: when the thing gets stolen, I'm required to report it and get a new one. That means paperwork and a couple of trips to city hall. Big fucking deal.
If you people actually took the time to educate yourselves about stuff you so religiously oppose, instead of following the herd and repeating the voice of the dumb masses, you might have noticed that the API is freely available, opensource implementations are already there, hence there is no bloody way the government can track you through it because nothing gets communicated to a central government server during any of your transactions. Otherwise it would bloody well show up in the API and opensource implementations and you can bet your ass it would be a huge scandal, and the whole eID deal would be dismissed faster than you can say "dog". The worst they could do is have the chip secretly log all transactions behind our backs, then datamine our returned IDs when they expire and we're supposed to exchange them for new ones. Yeah, 5 friggin' years later, they can finally get to my transaction logs. Whoopty-fucking-doo!
Maybe it's just 'coz most of you people live in the US... Living under a government that tested illicit drugs on their own troops to verify their validity as a weapon during the Vietnam era, that tested chemical warfare shit on their own soldiers during the gulf war, that constantly lies to their people to justify going to war (WMDs in Iraq anyone?) killing thousands of their citizens... Maybe all of that made you people a little paranoid and crazy in the head when it comes to trusting any government. But trust me; the worst shit that happens around here is some helicopter manufacturer paying some politicians to give them a positive evaluation when they're competing with another manufacturer to get this large government contract in, or politicians comitting fraud to line their own pockets and build luxury villas in a nice and quiet neighbourhood.
We Europeans value our privacy just as much as you yanks, the difference is we approach the privacy issue on a "think first, analyze the situation, then speak" basis, whereas you guys have more of a "shout fanatically as soon as anything even remotely applicable to our privacy gets mentioned" mentality. Fanatical shouting about stuff you don't understand doesn't make you seem more knowledgeable to anyone except your equally dumb peers who don't understand the stuff themselves, but have the same desire as you to belong to some "elite group of critical thinkers", although their thoughtprocesses could probably be surpassed by Lassie on a bad day.
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
That just verifies that someone behind the keyboard is in posession of the eID card of someone of a certain age. It does nothing to (and cannot possibly) verify that the fingers on the keyboard actually belong to face and identity on the card. The PIN helps, but still is not certain.
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
If there was a law regarding identity verification that they failed to follow, then and only then are they at fault.
Suppose this girl got dropped off at the mall to hang out with some friends, and she met this guy there. Should we sue the mall for its role in the situation? How is the mall doing anything differently from what MySpace does?
Parents should teach their children not to run off alone with strangers, particularly older ones. The responsibility is shared between the guy for being a worthless piece of scum, the girl for being stupid, and her parents for not teaching her any better. If anyone should be sued, it is the guy... you know, the one who actually acted with malicious intent.
But wait, he probably doesn't have any money, and that's what this is all about.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
The 14-year-old in all reality probably consented to whatever went on - maybe it's different across the pond but here in the UK pretty much ever girl, from thirteen and up, wants a 18+ boyfriend with a car and fat wallet - yeah, the guys are wrong for going along with it, but it's hardly 'worthless piece of scum' time - girls of that age are more likely to want a boyfriend of 19 than one of their own age (for the record, my girlfriend is 18, as am I).
If you let someone take you out on a date, and then go back to their place, you are obviously not being forced against your will to do those things - the girl spent many hours talking to this boy, via emails, phone calls, etc, and I'd bet you any money you like 'cybering' of some sort was involved, from both sides - I really doubt this guy sprang this on her after pretending to innocently take her out to dinner and a movie... but hey, one overzealous soccer mom finds out her underage daughter made out with a guy of 19 and it becomes 'sexual assault'. The article mentions a 27-year-old assaulting a 13-year-old, yeah, that guy's a 'worthless piece of scum' as I'm betting he lied about a lot more than one year and it was a lot less consentual, but this? This is just a teenage girl wanting an older boyfriend, her mom finding out and going apeshit, with the nice added bonus that if she keeps going apeshit she might get $30m in her back pocket.
Parents of teen girls: Girls of that age are sexually aware. Most girls that age want a dude with a car. This means that given the oppertunity they will jump their bones. Don't like it? Watch your damn children! If I'd spent hours on the phone to strangers every day my parents would sure as hell know about it, and if I arranged to meet anyone I met on the internet, alone, my mum'd still kick my ass for being so stupid even now.
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
She consented? No good, she's under 16, she's too stupid to make that decision. That capability doesn't magically appear until the day of her 16th birthday.
She lied about her age? Tough. He should have checked her ID.
He tried to break it off when he found out the truth and the whole "sexual assault" thing is typical teenage girl petty revenge? Well, sucks to be him.
Lots of possibilities here besides the simple "the guy is a sick pedo." But no one will consider any. He's better off just hanging himself in his jail cell right now. Even if by some miracle he's innocent and aquitted of wrongdoing, he's already been judged.
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nobody seems to realise that this entire issue is only an issue because most European-descended industrialised societies have run out of targets to hate. Other nations? No, we pity them, give them aid, and invade them, but we can't hate them: they're too weak to hate. Other religions? No, can't do that either: it causes civil strife within a nation and Crusades and Holy Wars without. Other races? Can't do that either. At least not publicly.
So goshdarnit, whom can we hate, unreservedly, with all our hearts? Gentlemen, the answer is paedophiles. That's right, child molesters. They are the new witches of today and we all enjoy seeing them burn at the stake: they are the one "species" we can all feel superior to and not feel guilty about it.
I remember a case here in England where two men shared a jail cell and one of them castrated the other because he had been convicted of some kind of rape. You wouldn't believe the smug self-satisfaction the public greeted this news with. No one seemed to notice that we shouldn't be resorting to criminals to mete out rough "justice" to other criminals: society itself is responsible for that, but would prefer to be hypocritical.
If the guy didn't actually forcibly rape the girl, the parent is absolutely correct: he should kill himself right now, because even if by some miracle, the courts acquit him, society has already judged him guilty. He will never recover from this debacle, careerwise or in any other sense. He is a marked man.
Surely in societies where girls as young as 9 - 12 boast of sleeping with two different boys in a single night at Catholic camp (yes, it happens, and often), a slight change in perspective is needed. There is a clear difference between such wanton and consensual promiscuity and those who genuinely do not wish to engage in sexual activity, whom the law seeks to protect. Unfortunately, below the current age of consent, it becomes difficult to legally seperate the two, the issue being topical enough as it is. It often becomes a case of "my word against yours", where the female word is often given more weight.
Until we have some progress, the fellow in TFA, if he is innocent of true forced rape, will be screwed by the mob justice the public is dying to mete out to him.
Really? Could have fooled me (Score:5, Interesting)
1) the girl alone is to blame for getting raped (as is usually the argument in this kind of a situation: a lot of guys seem to be _very_ quick to join in the chorus that there must have been something the woman said, or wore, or just being at the guy's house, or just being in a park alone, or whatever, that _clearly_ absolves the guy of any fault and makes rape entirely the woman's fault.)
2) the girl surely said "yes" and only she or her mother lied about it afterwards
3) (or maybe 2.a.) that for that matter the girl should have known that if she goes to a guy's house she's _expected_ to put out, so that is obviously "yes" enough for any guy, and obviously her fault if she acts surprised if the guy goes ahead and rapes her
4) She obviously lied about her age, probably even had a faked ID at that, and certainly any 14 year old looks just like a 19 year old. (Wonder why the paedophiles don't just go for 19 year olds, then, if they supposedly look the same as a child anyway?)
And several variations of the above. Complete with the usual blanket generalizations (e.g., surely if the guy had a car, the girl wanted to fuck him) that obviously justify the blanket conclusion that in any imaginable case one of the above applies.
Not saying that that couldn't have been the case, but the way they're passed for definitive truth before even knowing what happened there, is... strange.
And at any rate, far from being biased against the guy, I see only a lot of people who are _certain_ that it was the girl that's guilty before even making her case.
Frankly, all that's missing so far, to make the edifice of preconception complete, is the standard Slashdot blanket generalization "there are no women online, and any 14 year olds are male FBI agents." Presumably noone has yet figured how to make that fit a rape case, what with having to be present in court and go through a medical examination or whatnot. Kinda hard to fool all those that you're a 14 year old girl if you were a 40 year old guy. Still, I'm surprised that noone at least tried posting that. Kinda feels like not Slashdot without that being posted half a dozen times in a topic about people meeting online.
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
happens all the time, in every school, in every city. The only difference in this case was she met him on myspace instead of "at the library". It sucks to be him, but its not the schools fault and its not myspace's fault.
Re:How can they? (Score:4, Insightful)
As well he should. The 19-year old invited a 14-year old back to his place with the intent of having sex with her. Is there something else I'm missing in this picture?
Oh no! Teenagers having sex! Won't somebody please think of the children!
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
In the US sex with a minor is a statutory crime(hence statutory rape). This means that you are guilty of it merely by having been proven to have commited the act, there are no extenuating circumstances.
Therefor we know that he didn't have sex with her(or that she was consenting, is still consenting and won't testify against him). As he's not being charged with attempted rape we can probably even presume he didn't come very close to commiting said act.
Now we've got down to sexual assault, which can be pretty much anything from innapropriate touching, upward. That's probably very questionable behaviour, but not really all that unexpected on a date, particularly if they knew each other for a while.
All we really know in this case is that a 19 year old tried to date a 14 year old. While I personally think this is probably wrong, I also know that if he'd been 17 it would have been perfectly legal, even though she'd still be 14. She knew he was a high school senior on the football team(and it's not totally unheard of for guys on the football team to have been held back either for educational reasons or by parents who want them to have a size advantage), doesn't sound like too much of a lie to me. He didn't just abduct her off the street, and he seems(based on the levels of crime involved) to have let her go without too much of a fuss. So while he's probably a bit of an idiot, he's not exactly scum of the earth material.
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why ?
Re:How can they? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How can they? (Score:4, Insightful)
What other information do you need? If you have the name and address, that's all you need to come in the middle of the night and arrest them. Are you talking about whatever additional information that the authorities might need to decide that you are an enemy of the state? Well, once you have a giant database of names and addresses, a fascist government simply needs regular police monitoring to discover political dissidents in order to start disappearing people.
People living in fear of the authorities will call in and report a controversial editorial writer or talking head. People have reputations as to who they are, what they do, and what they believe, so all you need to do is start asking questions as to who has said what. There you get a name, and that is all you need.
Re:How can they? (Score:4, Funny)
This public service announcement brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department.
--Rob
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What they need. (Score:4, Interesting)
Right. Beacause community-based websites and bulletin boards have been around for such a long time, and there are so-o-o-o-o many legal challenges and precedents in that space.
Face it: The MySpace cesspool is in danger of leaking out and poisoning the well of community-based boards everywhere; the pure, crystal clear waters of SlashDot and its ilk are not going to have a cleansing effect, legal or otherwise, on MySpace.
I am seeing activism on the grass roots level against MySpace like I haven't seen since the early 90's (the kind of awareness that laid the groundwork for all the online child protection legislation). If the "good" community spaces are smart, they will toss MySpace out into the snow with extreme prejudice then circle the wagons before the Clintons and the Liebermans and all the other politicos up for re-election start painting them with the same brush they are currently tarring-up for MySpace.
Right or Wrong, there is a BIG RECKONING coming, and it WILL be impacting business models throughout the 'Net.
My Prediction, based on historical precedent? MySpace goes the way of GeoCities (socially un-cool and retro), and the kids all start gravitating to their own (and de-centralized) unique TLDs, just like their neo-adult blogging counterparts.
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
Because they have more money to sue for.
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is exactly the kind of story that should be covered in an afterschool special. If the family wants money, sell the story, to hell with the courts.
Personally, I think the family should be told to stuff it and she should be made an example of by the media as the stupid little slut she is. These stupid little girls need to be told, harshly, that trying to manipulate scuzzy guys with sex can very well get them hurt (or even killed). Instead, whenever it happens, the girls are never at fault and are always "good girls" who were unfairly victimized and could never do anything wrong - regardless of how trashy & loose they were.
A great example is this highschool girl from my hometown - she was dating a 30ish drug dealer several cities away for some time. As girls her age are prone to do, she grew tired of him and decided to break up with him. As they are also prone to do, they are petty & vindictive towards ex-boyfriends, and threatened to turn him in. As bigtime drugdealers are prone to do, he kidnapped her, beat her & eventually executed her, burying her body in a shallow grave in the mountains. Media response? Obviously she was pure, innocent & unfairly victimized by a complete monster. Not that she could -ever- have any idea that bad things could happen to her for sleeping with a man twice her age in exchange for meth...
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Interesting)
1) You can't monitor everything they do on the Internet anymore
2) There's still a lot of things they don't know (but should)
3) They think they know enough
Re:What they need. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
Up until the age of about 11 or 12 children should have no guaranteed privacy in terms of what they say and do, and if they've been used to loving oversight for all of their lives they won't have a problem with this.
Man it's Nazis like you that take a childs trust and piss all over it - I don't care if you are dressing it up in nicey nicey language and giving a couple of half-assed exceptions to your draconian behavior. I give my child the privacy he wants, he respects me and listens to what I say and then he does it too.
I warn him of the consequence, which is all I can do, and if he fucks up then its his fault. He knows he can talk to me if he does, he can talk to me about anything. I'm not going to start taking that freedom away and locking up his television/computer/bike when I dont think its right for him.
Thats called LEARNING. You cannot cotton ball children, or chain them up and make them do what you want. They will just end up resenting you and then before you know it (because they won't tell you) they will be hooked up with some druggy taking herion.
The next thing you'll know, mr/miss, is they're face'll be on the news found dead somewhere.
Good luck, you're going to need it.
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
But how did he learn that trust and respect in the first place? It doesn't happen by magic. Sure, children need to learn from mistakes, but those mistakes need to happen in a safe environment to start with so that the consequences are limited. When children are learning to walk we don't let them wander all over town and across busy streets - they're encouraged to try walking from one person to another in the home, and then outside holding an adults hand. Their freedom to walk without direct involvement of an adult is gradually increased, and if a worrying trend develops their their freedom is reined back a little, for instance if they keep wandering into the road then they might be made to hold hands for the rest of that trip and that pattern repeated until they've learnt the lesson.
Social interactions are no different, children gradually build up an understanding of how the world works and how to recognise danger in social situations. They aren't born with an innate ability to understand the world that would flourish if only parents didn't hold them back (as you seem to suggest). I can see your point: over-protectiveness can be just as damaging as neglect, but it's about being appropriate to the child's level of development. The majority of (but clearly not absolutely all) 14 year-olds are not ready to move about in the adult world completely unsupervised, be it virtually via the Internet or physically, as this story clearly illustrates.
Yes - but a responsible parent will ensure that the "fuck up" will not do serious damage to the mental or physical health of the child. In the case of this story the 'hands off' approach has been shown not to work - the mental and possibly physical heath of a minor has been seriously damaged through sexual assult that should not have been possible if appropriate supervision had been in place.
Re:What they need. (Score:4, Insightful)
I suppose you read the part of my post that mentioned the 12-16 range, right? Starting around 12 yo, you can't just check everything they do.
This may sound terribly draconian but I think it's the only way to bring up children safely and with an understanding of what's right and safe and what's wrong and dangerous.
You don't have kids, do you?
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Funny)
Outlandish, eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't too long ago that it could have been LiveJournal instead of MySpace in this headline. Should be interesting to see who winds up in the crosshairs once MySpace wears thin. Time for a loser-pays rule for suing, IMO.
Hang on... (Score:5, Insightful)
Whooooah there. Wait just one damn minute. You surely can't mean what I think you mean, do you? Please tell me I've misunderstood what you've said.
If you go around to someones place, they may or may not be hoping for something of a sexual nature to happen, but there is never, ever an expectation on someone to "put out" just because you went to visit. Yes, it is a fair assumption that someone who has just wined and dined you is going to try to put the moves on you, but merely visiting isn't consent to take things as far as they want. The visitor can soak up the dinner and movie, drop over, drink their coffee and eat their chips, and at the end of the evening get on up and go, and there's not a damn thing expected of them.
Having said that, I'd question the wisdom of heading back to a 19-year olds place after dinner and a movie because there's a good chance they've got something quite specific in mind. But bear in mind this is a 14-year old, and they don't always have the life experience to avoid making such a poor decision.
My reply to you would be far, far more vicious if I thought you genuinely meant what you've written. It just seems so far out that I'm hoping you chose your words poorly; please tell me that I've misread your actual intent.
Re:Hang on... (Score:5, Interesting)
Neither hoping for something nor expecting it means that the thing is in any way obliged to happen. That is, in this case, the 19 year old can *expect* the girl to put out after the things he's done, but she is in no way *obliged* to do so.
Change "expectation [cambridge.org]" in your post for "obligation [cambridge.org]" and you're spot on.
So, calm down, deep breaths, he didn't mean what you thought he meant
Re:Hang on... (Score:5, Insightful)
Here in the UK, I'd take "expected of you" to mean "someone is expecting something of you". Well, people can expect whatever they want, it doesn't mean that it's going to happen. Knowledge of that expectation may instill a feeling of obligation in the person concerned, but that's another matter entirely. In the context of the definition I referenced, the original phrase you quote would have a meaning of "If a 19 year old takes you to dinner and a movie and you agree to go back to his place certain (sexual) things are expected of you (the 19 year old hopes or believes that you will engage in these acts, but you are not necessarily obligated to do so)"
To my (UK) mind, an expectation is just a hope/belief, while an obligation is an expectation the non-fullfilment of which has consequences, including (as appropriate) the use of legal force to ensure the fullfilment and/or extract recompense for non-fulfilment.
Basically, me and the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary say that expectation is not the same as obligation. You and the Merriam-Webster dictionary disagree. It's a "two people separated by a common language" thing
Given that I also assume that the OP is American, I'll bow to your interpretation of his words, no matter how wrong it feels to me.
Re:Hang on... (Score:4, Interesting)
Women having sex consensually, and then crying rape afterwards is NOT uncommon...and coule have very well happened in this case.
Re:Hang on... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hang on... (Score:4, Insightful)
It is quite possible the teen snuck out without her parents knowledge- not hard to do, teens have lied about where they are going since the dawn of time. But even this is an assumption; she may just have terrible parents. And greedy ones too, apparently, given their choice of Myspace as a target.
Re:Hang on... (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact that teens sneak out does not mean that the parents aren't lousy. They're still responsible, and they're still lousy for letting their teen sneak out in the first place. More to the point they are lousy parents for forcing their kid to feel like they have to lie and / or sneak out to do the things they want. I didn't sneak out, because I knew I could go to my parents and tell them exactly where I was going.
Re:Hang on... (Score:4, Funny)
He should also hire someone to follow her 24 hours a day. Otherwise he's just not doing his job.
Re:Hang on... (Score:5, Insightful)
Part of me *hopes* this is a setup by the parents, in light of the "Palestinian runaway" and with MySpace being in the news an awful lot lately. It would make me feel better to think that her parents were trying to perpetrate a fraud than being just that hideously stupid. If your daughter is 14, you meet the people she goes out with, whether platonic or romantic. No exceptions.
Re:Hang on... (Score:5, Insightful)
While I think that it is terrible that this girl was assaulted, I still think this lawsuit is BS though with the parents and girl both shirking their own resposibility in avoiding the situation.
Re:Hang on... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hang on... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is when an underage user misrepresents him- or herself by saying that they're older than they are; THIS is a violation of their rules.
This is why I don't understand how age verification would have solved anything to begin with, because it wouldn't have stopped her from being on the site. But regardless, they shouldn't be held accountable because she broke the rules, period.
The bottom line is only the perp is responsible .. (Score:5, Insightful)
FTFA: The lawyer for the parents:
FTFA: The lawyer for the parents:
FTFA:
FTFA: Stanford Law School:
And the same can be said for the local mall, the local cineplex, the local church, the local school, the local park, and any one of a number of other venues. Pete Solis has been arrested and charged. MySpace hasn't been charged, because they commited no crime, and didn't go out of their way to enable a crime. The only other difference (and a very significant one) is Solis, the alleged rapist, doesn't have $30 million.
Bottom line: There is no real way to verify a person's age or identity online that doesn't also cause problems. The internet is like any other public place - anyone can use it, and anyone *will* use it - which is why parents need to be more vigilant. Even that won't be enough, though - if the Internet were to disappear tomorrow, rapes and assaults would still happen, no matter how careful everyone is ... which is why you go after the per[p|v]s.
Re:Hang on... (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't fear, I'm absolutely not suggesting that. I've met my fair share of teenage kids who show a hell of a lot more wisdom than someone twice their age. I've had my rear legitimately handed to me enough times in online discussions by people who have turned out to be twelve to know not to underestimate the young ones. But a good number of kids that age do have a degree of naivety, and some girls that age may not have caught onto the sheer number of people who will say and do whatever they can to get into someones pants.
Finally, I guess she does now have a 'life experience' from which she can learn, doesn't she?
Yes, and it's sad that she had to learn this way.
Re:What they need. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
If they meet on MySpace, that's one thing, but if they want to go and meet in person, no website in the world is responsible for that.
Re:What they need. (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't matter if it was consensual. (It probably wasn't forced sex, or he'd be charged with rape, not sexual assault)
It doesn't matter if this would never have come to light had the mother not found out.
He's 19. She's 14. As you said the law is the law, and sexual assault is sexual assault.
He should be prosecuted - it is his fault he fooled around with a minor, and all accounts indicate that she said she was 14 on myspace.
Oh, and btw, suing myspace is ridiculous.
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you leave your kids with a known pedophile you are guilty of willful endangerment irrespective whether anything happens. MySpace (as much as I think it's a worthless POS and should die) is not responsible for this. WTF was a 14 year old doing looking to meet a guy for anyway? And a Double WTF to the parents for not at least having the meeting supervised.
As a parent of two kids I will acknowledge that you can not watch your kids 100% of the time, but instilling basic self preservation and understanding of being in situations you can not control is something that should happen before a child is allowed to run free.
-nB
Re:You're Out Of Touch (Score:4, Insightful)
-nB
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree....what the hell happened to personal responsibility? And in this case...since she is a minor, it applies to her parents!!
Actually...I'd say the avg. 14 yr old today is more savvy than my generation and should know much better than this....as a young girl, you can't be that trusting of someone you just meet. Also, her parents should be keeping up with who her friends are and who she is meeting..especially from some online forum!
It isn't the websites fault nor responsibility to police behavior...they are just providing a communitcations forum.
People could be meeting by telephone, but, you wouldn't think of suing the phone company for not doing their part to screen people would you?
Re:What they need. (Score:5, Insightful)
Good point. The phone company is a common carrier and is not responsible for what people say and do with it.
Therefore she should sue her ISP, not MySpace. After all, her ISP is likely against net neutrality, implying that they do not wish to be a common carrier, and therefore are responsible for what happens over the connections they provide...and therefore are liable when bad things happen.
Wait what (Score:3, Insightful)
MySpace says on a "Tips for Parents" page that users must be 14 or older. The Web site does nothing to verify the age of the user, such as requiring a driver's license or credit card number, Loewy said.
What kind of 14 year old kid has a credit card or a license?
Re:Wait what (Score:5, Insightful)
The lawsuit claims that the Web site does not require users to verify their age and calls the security measures aimed at preventing strangers from contacting users younger than 16 "utterly ineffective."
But the part of the article that really caught my eye was the following:
Lauren Gelman, associate director of the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School, said she does not think MySpace is legally responsible for what happens away from its site.
"If you interact on MySpace, you are safe, but if a 13-year-old or 14-year-old goes out in person and meets someone she doesn't know, that is always an unsafe endeavor," Gelman said. "We need to teach our kids to be wary of strangers."
This lawsuit is just ambulance chasing.
"In May, after a series of emails and phone calls" (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"In May, after a series of emails and phone cal (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if Myspace *was* a pre-requisite for email, the rape didn't occur on-line. She met someone on-line and then decided to follow-up with a personal get-together. Where was her mother when she was getting ready for her "date"? What kind of mother teaches a 14-year-old girl that it's OK to meet strange guys? Finally, what's to say that age-verification would have prevented the rape? Do they really think that she would have been totally safe if she was meeting a completely anonymous boy her own age?
Re:"In May, after a series of emails and phone cal (Score:5, Funny)
Re:"In May, after a series of emails and phone cal (Score:4, Funny)
Sorry, but due to rampant inflation, the rate today is already $32 millions.
--
Krazy Kat and Ignatz Mouse [ignatzmouse.net]
mooches mooches (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:mooches mooches (Score:5, Interesting)
Next up: Teen sues the Internet (Score:5, Funny)
wait, screw this parody.
What the fuck is a 14-year kid old doing meeting a 19-year old she met om MySpace? I think she should sue her parents for not beating her enough.
Getting justice twice? (Score:5, Insightful)
i'm conflicted (Score:5, Funny)
on the other hand, this could destroy myspace: good thing
Hi.. (Score:5, Funny)
I am stupid. Please make them give me money.
Guess what? (Score:4, Insightful)
Interesting world we live in (Score:4, Interesting)
Rule of law, Rule of man.... I always assumed Rule of Law was better - but now I'm beginning to wonder... the longer and further we walk down this path the worse it gets.
Re:Interesting world we live in (Score:3, Insightful)
$30 million is two decades worth of average adult earnings to you?
See, this is why the US has problems with offshoring. I'll do the same job for only $20 million! And we're off on the slippery slope to an average adult only earning $10 million or so in two decades... disgraceful.
Wtf (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wtf (Score:5, Insightful)
They expect others to make their choices for them, and to do it correctly.. thus the reason for laws designed to make other people raise your kids for you (video game laws, TV censorship/ratings laws, movie ratings, etc).. and of course if these other people and companies do it wrong they are held liable because well.. it wasn't their fault for being "stupid"...they outsourced their decision making to you so you are now liable.
It sucks to be sure, but this is what an ignorant majority wanted, so this is what our society has produced.
Wait just a minute... (Score:5, Insightful)
Age verification is fine for sites that require you to be 18 or over, but if you want 14-year-olds to use your site, I can't think of a good way to verify their age that doesn't have really disturbing implications.
If they talked to each other on the phone several times before meeting in person, why is AT&T not liable for failing to protect her?
Let me see if I understand this correctly: a 19-year-old claimed to be only 18 on his myspace profile, and this is worth $30 million?
I'm not excusing the guy's actions. He knew she was 14, and that's not OK, even if she said yes, which I'm guessing she probably did. And lying about your age is generally not cool. But I really don't think MySpace could have reasonably done anything that would have stopped this from happening. Do you think she wouldn't have agreed to meet him, if she had known he was really 19?
They started by sending e-mail, then exchanging phone numbers and talking on the phone; at what point do you draw the line and say what these people do is not MySpace's responsibility? If I find a (18+) girl on MySpace, send her e-mail, she e-mails me back, I send her my phone number, she calls me, we talk, we go out for coffee, things go well, we start dating, have dinner a few times, then one day we get into an argument and she punches me in the face - can I sue MySpace for failing to protect me from her?
Re:Wait just a minute... (Score:3, Insightful)
Does MySpace generate an age from a user input date of birth or could he have written the profile when he was 18?
Also since this involves an alleged sexual assault why arn't the police involved...
Re:Wait just a minute... (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, assuming she had hit puberty, what's the problem? Most likely, he was much closer to her in maturity level than he was girls his own age.
This magical age limit thing is really bothering me.. especially since each country seems to have their own magical number. I can understand there needing to be a set agelevel as far as the law goes, because measuring maturity-level is pretty much impossible.. But we don't *need* to be as stupid when it comes what we deem moral. A childish 19 year old boy can be perfect match for a grown-up'ish 14 year old maturity-wise.
Informed consent (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Informed consent (Score:4, Interesting)
Exactly..the line was drawn somewhere and most people admit it is arbitrary, yet people like my friend who was 20 and had sex with a 17-year old is a Registered Sex Offender (TM) for committing misdemeanor statutory rape. Nevermind the fact that he's now been married to the girl for 4 years and they now have a little one year old daughter.
The girl objected to his prosecution that was sought by her mother. She refused to testify against him at trial and spent a week in jail and paid court fines for contempt. She turned 18 just a few months after the trial and once she did she left her mother to live with the family of her then boyfriend and has been with him ever since.
Our church has a TaeKwan Do ministry (don't ask) and my friend was an instructor. He was always there with a room full of parents and other instructors and students. One of the parents found out he was a 'sex offender' and reported him to the police, saying that it didn't 'look right' that he was instructing martial arts (some of the students were teen). Due to Georgia's get-tough-on-sex crimes laws he was arrested with only the complain. In Georgia, sex offenders suspected of violating sex crimed laws are not granted bail. They are held until a finding of fact hearing be the court (IANAL but this is what his attorney called it). In his case the court date was a month away and he had a one week old baby at home. The attorney petitioned the judge for a special hearing due to his circumstances (the baby) and the judge released him on a signature bond. This was very unusual as most judges won't do that. At the final hearing the judge ruled that he did not violate any statues (remember: he's a sex offender, not on parole!) and that the claims were without merit. The judge also admonished the legislature for creating vague rules that are impossible to implement and are open to any number of interpretations.
The puritanical nature of our laws is absolutely ridiculous and is in my opinion catering to the right-wing fundamentalists in the republican party. I am a conservative Christian and former republican, by the way. I left the party when I decided the republicans could no longer perform simple addition and subtraction (read: balance a budget) and when they handed defeat to terrorists by encouraging the public to actually be afraid of them (the terrorists' stated purpose).
Re:Informed consent (Score:4, Interesting)
According to this article [usatoday.com] by the age of 15 about 25% of people will have had sex. (It's the nifty table down the page a bit.)
Whether they're ready for it or not doesn't seem to matter if 1 out of 4 of em are doing it.
In my mind it becomes difficult to say why a 14 year old should only be making bad choices with other 14 year olds, or would they be better of with people of other age ranges.
Underpants Gnomes (Score:3, Funny)
Phase 2: Fuck around with your boyfriend
Phase 3: Lawyer up and sue!
Phase 4: ???
Phase 5: 30 Million Dollars Profit.
Someone has to say it.... (Score:5, Funny)
Sue /. (Score:5, Funny)
And if that fails I could sue my laywer for not protecting me against sueing someone for rediculous reasons.
Teen *didn't* sue MySpace (Score:5, Informative)
Well they have a small paragraph in the terms... (Score:5, Informative)
====
Limitation on Liability. IN NO EVENT SHALL MYSPACE.COM BE LIABLE TO YOU OR ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, EXEMPLARY, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, INCLUDING LOST PROFIT DAMAGES ARISING FROM YOUR USE OF THE SERVICES, EVEN IF MYSPACE.COM HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY CONTAINED HEREIN, MYSPACE.COM'S LIABILITY TO YOU FOR ANY CAUSE WHATSOEVER AND REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OF THE ACTION, WILL AT ALL TIMES BE LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT PAID, IF ANY, BY YOU TO MYSPACE.COM FOR THE SERVICES DURING THE TERM OF MEMBERSHIP.
Indemnity. You agree to indemnify and hold MySpace.com, its subsidiaries, and affiliates, and their respective officers, agents, partners and employees, harmless from any loss, liability, claim, or demand, including reasonable attorneys' fees, made by any third party due to or arising out of your use of the Services in violation of this Agreement and/or arising from a breach of this Agreement and/or any breach of your representations and warranties set forth above and/or if any Content that you post on the Website or through the Services causes MySpace.com to be liable to another.
====
http://www1.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=misc
The law protecting the dumb and stupid (Score:3, Insightful)
That turned 180 degrees. Today, being stupid can be very profitable. Thus we get all those neat little "safety stickers" (you know, the "things look smaller in mirror" crap things) on EVERYTHING. In a perfect world, those stickers wouldn't exist and Darwin would be given a chance to prove his theory that whoever is too stupid to live will be eliminated from the gene pool. The stupid would die out and evolution would take over.
Suddenly Creationism (and its advocates) starts to make sense. Not as a theory, but just WHY they advocate it. I mean, would you like a theory that told you that you should've been eliminated centuries ago... anyway.
Our legal system is protecting those who're too stupid to live. Not every time, mind you, there are still very justified suits, but there's a lot of suits that reek like this one. I'm stupid, and it's someone else's fault that my being stupid and careless, and that I didn't think put me in an undesireable position.
It's convenient to blame someone else for our mistakes. And profitable! But as a bottom line, there are 3 people to blame:
The 19 year old, for he should DEFINITLY have known better.
The parents of the 14 year old, for they should have cared what their daughter is doing online.
The 14 year old, for not thinking what a 19 year old could have in mind.
Where I do blame most of the 14 year olds fault at her parents again. Why didn't they prepare her? They should have told her what a 19 year old wants from her, they should have told her that it's not a good idea to meet a random stranger online.
But that would have required to talk with her about (*eek*) sex! It's more convenient and less embarrassing to sue now.
And of course start a riot about how online media need to be doing the parent's job! I.e., watching what their kids do online.
How do we protect teens from their own ignorance? (Score:4, Insightful)
Suing for stupidity (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe I'm old... (Score:5, Insightful)
The internet is the greatest market place in the world. People go here for trade, conversation, news/gissip and inspiration. There are public spaces where you can make a fool of yourself and there are dark back alleys where other people can make a fool of you. This is a place where everyone is treated like a adult with no regard for your age.
How many parents would let their 14yr old children roam a big unknown city at night by themselves? How do children learn to recognize the good from the bad it their parents don't guide them?
When someone has a private party (myspace) and is inviting children to join in... what may be expected? What is posible to expect?
In this case, myspace had no way of knowing that this man could be treat to this girl. You can not assume that every 18+ male is a pervert. This relationship (if that's the word) developed mostly outside the control and supervision of myspace. I think that there is really nothing myspace could have done differently; except maybe, not to invite children to begin with.
What's in their heads? (Score:5, Insightful)
The children are protected online. Their problem is protection offline beyond the realms of a website. MySpace is not revealing personal data at another member's request through their website. The children are protected online to the best of MySpace's abilities. This girl wasn't abused on the web in a session of cybersex where MySpace provided a button to electrochute her.
How concerned her parents is on protecting her offline is a better question.
Obviously, they can do the basics as verifying personal data, and we have a similar site in Sweden that does exactly that, but abuse still happens, because believe it or not, there still exist plenty of jerks who don't mind providing their real information. Most probably get away with it too, by threatening the girl to not speak. In the end, your own mind is your most powerful weapon against "online predators".
The major flaw in their argument is that she was fully protected online, as MySpace does not allow members to get actual address and user information at request. Their problem is that she was not protected offline, and who's to deal with that if not her friends and/or parents. Have your first date at your parents home and have a talk in your room to get to know each other better for christ sake, not his apartment or something. Get some friends and go to the movies and have a good time while you get to know him. It doesn't have to be all "OMG, let's go to your apartment on our first date and have sex". Especially if you're just 14.
Daily Show Perfect Quote (Score:5, Funny)
"On the downside they're loaded with sexual predators. On the upside they're loaded with sexual prey."
Straight from the TOS. I hope Myspace sues her. (Score:4, Insightful)
Straight from the MYspace Terms of Service...
"Please choose carefully the information you post on MySpace.com and that you provide to other Users."
Choose being the key word here. She chose to contact people with her personal information, thus putting herself at risk...
"Your MySpace.com profile may not include the following items: telephone numbers, street addresses, last names"
If her profile can not contain any personal contact info as per the rules, she then chose (theres that word again) to contact this 19 year old.
Myspace is not at fault for anything.
If anything, this 14 year old is a whore.
Case and point.
Ummm... am I missing something? (Score:4, Insightful)
misleading summary (Score:4, Insightful)
"A 14-year-old is suing MySpace
it should read:
"An opportunist shyster is capitalizing on a 14-year-old's misfortunes to shake down MySpace
Re:yay (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Require retention of conversations for underage (Score:3, Interesting)
It is incredibly simple - put the PC in the living room and pay attention to what the children are doing. Blaming the victim is pointless but a couple of simple steps and a bit of parental reponsibility can stop a few future victims. Selling the net as a sanitised, safe environment is just as silly as doing the same thing with a bus terminal - no amount of placebo filtering programs or trying to software restrict to OMG Pon