Sometimes bullying people just doesn’t work out, even if you do it on the internet, and even if all you’re doing is posting pictures of naked girls without their permission.
The founder of a so-called “revenge porn” website has been ordered to pay $250,000 (£170,000) in damages for defamation.
Hunter Moore was found to have made false claims about the chief executive of an anti-bullying website.
Mr Moore used Twitter to falsely claim James McGibney was a paedophile who possessed child pornography.
Mr Moore’s website used to post naked images of people without their permission. He closed it in 2012.
But three days later he was at it again.
Mr Moore used his Twitter account, which has almost 150,000 followers, to make several derogatory comments about Mr McGibney.
Mr Moore encouraged others to post the claims in return for free clothing – Mr McGibney said he would be taking action against those that did so.
“‘Internet tough guys’ are also legally accountable for their actions,” Mr McGibney wrote.
“Hunter and some of his followers now realise this, along with their parents since some of his followers appear to be under the age of 18.”
The settlement amount was said to be a “conservative estimate” of reputational damage caused by Mr Moore’s comments.
The money would donated to women’s shelters across the US, Mr McGibney added.
So you’re not allowed to slander people? Even on the internet? I thought you were.
In addition to the defamation claim, Mr McGibney has launched a class action lawsuit against the site, and has invited users to come forward to share their complaints.
“We’re doing this mostly for the completely powerless, under-age women who were verbally harassed after Hunter posted their completely naked, unedited photos on his site.
“We’ll soon be launching a brand new site for IsAnyoneUp.com that not only shows the history and eventual dismantling of this disturbing website, but also brings valuable information to people who have been wronged by similar behaviour.”
Jeez, they were only having a little fun, and free speech.
One Twitter warrior had a strange reaction to the story.
Interesting libel case. I wonder if this sort of ruling would apply to accusations of “misogyny” & “active racism”?
Wut?
The relevant comparison is to accusations of “misogyny” as opposed to, say, accusations of being a smelly ugly cunt?
Yeh I don’t think so.
Me neither.
Funny and just it is when someone with a little privilege and power votes against the status quo. Not funny: That privilege and power is pretty much required for fast action.
Brave heroes are not so when there is a possibility of been held acountable? Who would guess it?
But they’re only speaking truth to power. We know, every last one of us, that women wear the pants in this world. 🙂
Hey, Ophelia, everybody knows it’s worse to be called “misogynist” or “racist” than to actually have to deal with misogyny and racism on a daily basis.
The latter’s a drag, probably, but hey-ho. The former has to do with respectable-middle-class-white-man-reputation and/or feelings, which is, you know, serious.
(Ohai, Jeremy Stangroom! How ya doin’?)
But won’t someone stand up for the sacred right of freeze peach? If bullies don’t have the right to smear lies across the internet, then we’ll have secret police arresting people for thought crime. Won’t someone think of the freeze peach?
Tangentially relevant (Dagens Nyheter, Sweden’s biggest daily (not counting evening tabloids)) (legal terms approximately, inexpertly translated):
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/natmobbning-kan-vara-vallande-till-annans-dod
More than tangentially relevant, in my view.
So, Mr. Moore posts naked pictures of women without their consent, calls another guy a pedophile, and the law comes down on him for doing the second of those two things?
Um, yeah, you missed something there Mr. Law.
People have been known to hide their cash reserves, plead poverty, and declare bankruptcy in order to avoid paying compensation to their victims. I’m guessing Moore has a few more tricks up his sleeve.