Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Reply To Thread

Vogue model wins right to unmask offensive blogger Follow

#102 Aug 20 2009 at 5:15 PM Rating: Good
***
1,260 posts
Quote:
Salisbury contends her client's blog would have remained in obscurity had Cohen not filed her lawsuit. The site had negligible traffic and only five posts, all written on a single day.


link

This was really petty. Who would file a lawsuit about what someone wrote in the boonies of the internet one day? She has issues to hold a grudge that long.
#103 Aug 20 2009 at 5:53 PM Rating: Good
I wonder what would happen if the blogger in this case or a similar future case to this one, was unmasked and found to be 11years old and living somewhere in afghanistan or some other place like that like Iran?

Hello *****, its Judge calling, erm about that case, well we have found who wrote it, but the Iranian govt (or similar) have told us to tell you to **** off as there is no way they will let a ***** like you sue one of their citizens.

Also unfortunatly the fact that your immoral skankiness is trying to sue a good muslim child for his comments has angered the general population of Iran (or similar) when it was announced on their news network, have a nice day.

Its a bit far fetched, but due to the cross border nature of ze intraweb these days, the process of suing over something relatively trivial could potentially result in a far larger defamation of character and whatnot than just doing nothing.
#104 Aug 21 2009 at 6:03 AM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
You could be right. I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of this case, either. But calling someone a psychotic, lying, whoring ***** seems pretty specific to me, personally.


Huh? Did you read something that wasn't in the article? This is the entirety of the quotes in the article from the blog post:

Quote:
"I would have to say the first-place award for ‘Skankiest in NYC’ would have to go to Liskula Gentile Cohen,” the blogger “Anonymous” wrote in one posting. The blog, since removed, ridiculed the former Australian Vogue covergirl as a “40-something” who “may have been hot 10 years ago”, when she was actually 36.



The bolded words are the *only* words we know appeared in his post. Period. Where does he say "psychotic, lying, whoring..."?


While I'm perfectly willing to allow for the possibility that the full text of the post included some other suit-worthy statements, I'm also not going to assume that it did, much less just make them up on the fly.


I got it from the article that Kavekk linked a few posts back. This link.
#105 Aug 22 2009 at 8:51 AM Rating: Decent
Belkira the Tulip wrote:


It's interesting how a different perspective can change one's mind sometimes.

Quote:
Despite the fact that you might expect that a city with millions of inhabitants would offer plenty of options for discussion at the blog, the five posts there (all of which appeared in August of last year) all have the tag Liskula, and appear to involve personal, rather than professional photography.

Aside from the personal pics, the entries contain a lot of vitriol, such as, "How old is this *****? 40 something? She's a psychotic, lying, whoring, still going to clubs at her age, *****." (Ms. Cohen, for the record, is younger than 40.) Her suit argues that this, and the tiny bits of other text that appeared at ****** in NYC constitute defamation. Since the blogger is anonymous, however, there is an extra legal hurdle between Cohen and whatever financial revenge she seeks.


Sounds very much like someone with a personal grudge aiming to harm her or her career. Might even be a fellow model. I'm not so opposed to the revelation of the blogger's identity, given the alternate perspective, though I do still think it's a bad precedent.
#106 Aug 22 2009 at 8:55 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
The Internet doesn't have a special dispensation toward anonymity. We tend to think of it as being entirely anonymous, but no law protects that.

In the days before the Internet, what option would this person have had? She could take out a newspaper ad - but generally not anonymously; and had she done that, no one would have quibbled over the newspaper revealing her identity.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#107 Aug 22 2009 at 9:05 AM Rating: Good
Samira wrote:
The Internet doesn't have a special dispensation toward anonymity. We tend to think of it as being entirely anonymous, but no law protects that.

In the days before the Internet, what option would this person have had? She could take out a newspaper ad - but generally not anonymously; and had she done that, no one would have quibbled over the newspaper revealing her identity.


Flyers on telephone poles? Writing on the bathroom walls? Both guarantee the same level of anonymity we typically expect of the internet.
#108 Aug 24 2009 at 5:28 AM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
Sorry if this is old, but the blogger's identity has been revealed.

Oh, and she's suing Google for $15 million for having "breached its fiduciary duty to protect her expectation of anonymity."
#109 Aug 24 2009 at 5:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
Samira wrote:
The Internet doesn't have a special dispensation toward anonymity. We tend to think of it as being entirely anonymous, but no law protects that.

In the days before the Internet, what option would this person have had? She could take out a newspaper ad - but generally not anonymously; and had she done that, no one would have quibbled over the newspaper revealing her identity.


Flyers on telephone poles? Writing on the bathroom walls? Both guarantee the same level of anonymity we typically expect of the internet.


Sure, and people can observe both of those activities. Hell, these days they'll likely be picked up on CC.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#110 Aug 24 2009 at 6:51 AM Rating: Decent
*****
10,359 posts
Quote:
Oh, and she's suing Google for $15 million for having "breached its fiduciary duty to protect her expectation of anonymity."


They can't catch a break huh?

Quote:
Hell, these days they'll likely be picked up on CC.


Smiley: tinfoilhat
#111 Aug 24 2009 at 8:50 AM Rating: Decent
Admiral LockeColeMA wrote:
Sorry if this is old, but the blogger's identity has been revealed.

Oh, and she's suing Google for $15 million for having "breached its fiduciary duty to protect her expectation of anonymity."


Related article:

http://www.crn.com/security/219400947;jsessionid=4A21R1WF2UGOJQE1GHPSKHWATMY32JVN

I especially like the quote at the end:

Quote:
"Young people today have no concept of privacy," he said. "They don't even know they've lost it."



Also:

Quote:
The surprising decision, though, seems to have only increased the bad blood between the two women, who knew each other from Manhattan's fashion scene and reportedly quarreled after Cohen badmouthed Port to her ex-boyfriend.


Seems my second assessment was right on the money.



Edited, Aug 24th 2009 11:53am by BrownDuck
1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 225 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (225)