Controversy Erupts Over Craigslist Prank 674
An anonymous reader writes to mention something of an ongoing controversy over a recent Craigslist prank. Waxy.org has the full details: "On Monday, a Seattle web developer named Jason Fortuny started his own Craigslist experiment. The goal: 'Posing as a submissive woman looking for an aggressive dom, how many responses can we get in 24 hours?' He took the text and photo from a sexually explicit ad in another area, reposted it to Craigslist Seattle, and waited for the responses to roll in ... '178 responses, with 145 photos of men in various states of undress. Responses include full e-mail addresses (both personal and business addresses), names, and in some cases IM screen names and telephone numbers.' In a staggering move, he then published every single response, unedited and uncensored, with all photos and personal information to Encyclopedia Dramatica." The Wired blog 27B Stroke 6 has analysis of the prank, which author Ryan Singel views as 'sociopathic'. He then follows that up with responses to comments from his analysis, with further exploration of the weighty issues this juvenile prank has brought up.
Responses (Score:5, Informative)
Encyclopaedia Dramatica Link (Score:2, Informative)
http://pr0n.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/R
Re:Legal Implications? (Score:5, Informative)
"But was any law actually broken? Fortuny obviously misrepresented himself under false pretenses, which is itself possibly actionable, but the privacy implications beyond that are very interesting. Does emailing someone your personal information act as an implicit waiver of your right to privacy? I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I can tell, no.
If taken to court, he's at risk of two primary civil claims. "Intentional infliction of emotional distress," while notoriously hard to prove in court, is certainly easier here based on his own writings. The second, more relevant claim, is "public disclosure of private facts." This Findlaw article on the Washingtonienne scandal sums it up nicely:
The disclosure must be public. The facts must be private. The plaintiff must be identified. The publication must be "highly offensive." And there must be an "absence of legitimate concern to the public" with respect to the publication.
It certainly seems like this clearly fits the criteria for a tort claim, but I'd love to hear some legal interpretation from the law bloggers out there. Does volunteering your information in a private context somehow invalidate your privacy rights? I don't think so. (For more information, see the EFF's Bloggers' FAQ on Privacy.)"
Trollin trollin trollin (Score:3, Informative)
Rawhide! Seriously though, this guy was just trolling, a well honed art here on /. In any case he appears to be an attention whore with personal issues, this hit fark a while back, and apparently on his myspace profile he describes himself as a "Ferris Beuller", and tells all the little people not to feel bad that they can't be him. Theres nothing deep here, no hidden agenda, no implications for the wider society, just a sad little man. I wonder will they sue him? Now that would be ironic - hey man, didn't you know? The internet isn't anonymous!
Re:How would he like it? (Score:1, Informative)
Here's the asshole's contact info (Score:1, Informative)
320 10th St
Kirkland, WA 98033
(425) 443-1573
RFJason@RFJason.com
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:It's perhaps time people understood (Score:5, Informative)
In Norway, people automatically have copyright on any picture that is (mostly) of themselves. If this is also the case in the jurisdiction(s) in question, then the above is not the case.
just incase anyone wants to SAY HI to this guy (Score:1, Informative)
RFJason
726 Kirkland Cir
Apt C203
Kirkland, WA 98033
United States of America
Registrar: DomainPeople Inc.
Domain Name: rfjason.com
Created on
Expires on
Record last updated on
Administrative Contact:
RFJason
Jason Fortuny
726 Kirkland Cir
Apt C203
Kirkland, WA
98033, US
(425)5765417
(425)5765417
RFJason@Hotmail.com
Technical Contact:
RFJason
Jason Fortuny
726 Kirkland Cir
Apt C203
Kirkland, WA
98033, US
(425)5765417
(425)5765417
RFJason@Hotmail.com
Domain servers in listed order:
ns0.xname.org 195.20.105.149
ns1.xname.org
(rfjason.com)
Re:It's perhaps time people understood (Score:2, Informative)
Just because you assert it does not make it true.
These letters were responses to the the posting of a fraudulent offer. The person committing the fraud then published these letters without the permission of the authors.
So besides fraud, the original poster (whom many have deemed a sociopath) has also committed extensive violations of copyright law. Each letter is a count (at least) under the Federal statutes which make copyright violation a felony.
Yes, privately you can do with any letter what you want. Publicly is another matter.
Just like if you decide to assert you are a submissive fem. Privately no one has (or should have) any problem with that. Publicly, if you actually are not, is another story.
Re:It's perhaps time people understood (Score:2, Informative)
Unless you took it, in which case you are the copyright holder. They would certainly need your permission to redistribute it.
Re:Legal Implications? (Score:2, Informative)
Unless he got the "doms" to sign releases-- or at the very least had a line in the ad that said any submission (no clever wordplay intended) would be his property, all rights reserved etc. etc. then he is without question reproducing their images without permission.
Is it this one? (Score:1, Informative)
Kirkland, WA 98033
---
I would be worried, that's from wayback...and I'm internet savy and have used CAS for kinky stuff. But then again i live in SF and know lots of poly types. someone else might be extremely pissed.
---
the dude used to run an SM website too. fuckin asshole.
Re:This is not exactly a new trick (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's perhaps time people understood (Score:5, Informative)
Not true.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_release [wikipedia.org]
Re:The jokes on you! (Score:2, Informative)
Link not work safe!!! (Score:3, Informative)
Terms of Use (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.craigslist.org/about/terms.of.use.html [craigslist.org]
Also, under the do-not-post-under-any-surcumstances section (7 - "CONDUCT"), we find anything:
i) that is false, deceptive, misleading, deceitful, misinformative, or constitutes "bait and switch";
Sounds like this guy's in for a real surprise, especially if craigslist chooses to prosecute. I don't claim to know the full extent of the law, but I do know that they could nail him good for that one. That's what the Terms of Use are for.
CL's Terms of Service...hope they go after him (Score:1, Informative)
g) that impersonates any person or entity, including, but not limited to, a
craigslist employee, or falsely states or otherwise misrepresents your
affiliation with a person or entity (this provision does not apply to Content
that constitutes lawful non-deceptive parody of public figures.);
h) that includes personal or identifying information about another person
without that person's explicit consent;
i) that is false, deceptive, misleading, deceitful, misinformative, or
constitutes "bait and switch";
Additionally, you agree not to:
s) "stalk" or otherwise harass anyone;
t) collect personal data about other users for commercial or unlawful
purposes;
You understand and agree that, because damages are often difficult to quantify,
if it becomes necessary for craigslist to pursue legal action to enforce the
TOU, you will be liable to pay craigslist the following amounts as liquidated
damages, which you accept as reasonable estimates of craigslists' damages for
the specified breaches of the TOU:
a. If you post a message that (1) impersonates any person or entity; (2)
falsely states or otherwise misrepresents your affiliation with a person or
entity; or (3) that includes personal or identifying information about
another person without that person's explicit consent, you agree to pay
craigslist one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each such message.
f. If you aggregate, display, copy, duplicate, reproduce, or otherwise
exploit for any purpose any Content (except for your own Content) in
violation of the TOU without craigslist's express written permission,
you agree to pay craigslist three thousand dollars ($3,000) for each day
on which you engage in such conduct."
Re:Missing? (Score:2, Informative)
Long short story, ED has a few articles making fun of Wikipedia. One of them was about MONGO [encycloped...matica.com], so he decided to use one of his puppets and list the ED article on Wikipedia for deletion. Since lots of wikipedians can't stand satire when they're the target of it, many voted delete. Now, if you're familiar with Wikipedia and look at the AfD, it's obvious that it should have been closed as "No consensus" instead of "Delete", but the admin decided to ignore the votes and get away with his bias. So much for democracy, huh?
It's sad, but not even Wikipedia is free from censorship. If the majority of the Wikipedians don't like or agree with something, it WILL get deleted. All it takes is putting up an AfD and writing "Delete per WP:CNEIAMUP" (Wikipedia: Completely Non-Existant, Irrelevant And Made Up Policy). Being a wikibot is all about linking to WP: policies, make up interpretations for them and pretend they apply to the current article. And of course, you also need double-standards for all those "Shitty Webcomic with 10 hits per day", because webcomics rock!
It's denying information to people "just because". They're not even saving space by deleting the article, the history is still saved. That AfD was just a childish "Ha-ha, we don't like you so we're going to deny information to anyone that happens to be interested in Encyclopedia Dramatica!". Jimbo Wales said, "Imagine a world in which every single person is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing.". He should have added "As long as we like that subject."
Ooops... about his personal info (Score:5, Informative)
Ooops, his info just happened to fall out of no where?
Jason Fortuny 726 Kirkland Cir Apt C203 Kirkland, WA 98033, US (425)576-5417
E-mail: rfjason@hotmail.com, rfjason@livejournal.com
AOL IM: RFJason
ICQ UIN: 126276821
Yahoo! ID: RFJason
MSN Username: RFJason
Possible IP: 24.19.185.8
Actually there may be a lawsuit. I contacted my lawyer and sent him the link. He said that there is the definite possibility for legal action both civil and criminal. But also that it could fall into federal crimes category.
Hopefully a law firm in Washington will open a class action against him, plus the DA opens a case. I hope he learns not to "push peoples buttons" and gets the fucking living shit beaten out of him in prison. Yes, some of these guys are pervs or whatever, if you are trying to prove a point about insecurity, you could block out the full emails or addresses not to be an asshole and still get the point. You also just sent your name into Search Engine hell so good luck ever getting a job, since when your next potential employer decides to possibly Google your name.
He also has no idea about being an admin, and can not call him self a network administrator because his contact mail script, is full of holes running off what seems to be his own box at his house. A+ for effort, you dumbshit. I hope you get what is coming to you.
Re:copyright violation? (Score:3, Informative)
The US hasn't required registration for Copyright since 1976 (though it has advantages in damages awarded). And there is no such thing as "releasing it in such a fashion that it might be public domain" -- authors have to make any transfer of rights and ownership explicitly, there is no such thing as implicit transfer of copyright under current US or international law (most major countries are signatories of the Berne Convention).
Illegal? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:It's perhaps time people understood (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, these people were hoping to get laid. Which bypasses the brain and goes straight to other body parts.
A commercial business does this regularly. (Score:4, Informative)
Most of the personals ads in Women seeking Men on Craigslist are fake. Most of them are spam for dating services, autoresponders for porno sites, or gay guys trolling for pictures of men.
Some of the fake ads are from a commercial service, CatchEmOut.com [catchemout.com]. This company runs fake dating ads, logs the e-mail addresses, and, for only $4.95, you can search their database. "Find out about their secret life before it's too late" they advertise. "Dating and Escort sites are booming with some genuine people and many people just trawling for an affair or casual sex. If you think, or are just curious if your partner maybe registered on one of these sites, has answered to one or has contacted a prostitute via E-Mail there is now an answer." "We will look through our available database and let you know INSTANTLY which site they are registered on, or which ads they may have replied to."
So someone has already been doing this. For money.
I know this guy personally, yes he's real. (Score:4, Informative)
Had the pleasure of seeing him post my high school alumni board in the thread used for Military people to post their current whereabouts and adventures. In the middle of some guys in Iraq posting their status and catching up with old friends, this winner jumps in with a rant detailing how injured soldiers and their families deserve the pain and suffering due to their support of the war and current administration. Not a thought was given to those who may have enlisted under the previous administration.
Needless to say, the group was highly disturbed, Mr. Fortuny continued to verbally spar with all who would entertain him highlight how they "didn't get it" where he did and reaffirming that those in the military deserved the wounds and deaths, further stating that they were most likely in the military due to their sub-par intelligence and inability to get a real job anyhow.
And then he was banned from the forum.
I can assure you that this guy is real, as his is contact information. When telling the veterans how dumb they were he was quite proud that his personal information was easy to find with a little research (clearly confident that military grunts are too stupid to work google for anything beyond sports scores and porn) and welcomed anyone to come visit him. This was, of course, coupled with the comment that if he were to get his ass beat by a military man this would prove how primitive and honorless they are.
Well, as a military man myself, I think I can handle the loss of status in his eyes in exchange for a few minutes of showing him what uneducated people get taught to do with their hands. (Bestill your comments on how right that may make him. Some comments are unforgivable.)
This is a common theme with Mr. Fortuny, in my observations. I'm not sure if it's a lashing out at the world for some wrong he experienced or if this is the typical reaction of someone who gets stomped on IRL so he flexes his muscles and works his agressions virtually. Either way his actions are inexcusable. I really would have thought this guy would have come much further in the 10 years since high school.
As for the legal ramifications, IANAL but, isn't the lone fact that he attained all these emails disguised as someone else a huge factor? Reminds me of grifters, con artists and black mailers.
It does appear, at the very least, that Jason violated the TOS with Craigslist.com:
"You agree to NOT use the Service to:
Upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive to another's privacy (up to, but not excluding any address, email, phone number, or any other contact information without the written consent of the owner of such information), hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable."
I think this would be an easy civil trial. But the next week or so should be the most interesting as Jason, our mutual friends and, evidently, his downstairs neighbor all wait to see what sort of truely deranged and violent person would respond to an ad like that.
Thoughts?
Re:It's perhaps time people understood (Score:2, Informative)