Slashdot Mirror
Oregon Woman Sues Yahoo for $3 Million
bigtallmofo writes "After notifying Yahoo that two member profiles about her were not authorized, Cecilia Barnes of Oregon is suing Yahoo for $3 million for failing to take down the profiles in a timely manner. The profiles allegedly set up by her ex-boyfriend contained nude photos of her along with her email address and work phone number. (Note: The member profiles have since been taken down by Yahoo)."
I think that portal-based adult groups will probably go "bye-bye" if they are viewed as a financial risk to the hosting site. Yahoo puts all of this webspace up without asking questions about the veracity of the information and then doesn't have the resources to properly police it. I'm sure MSN will drop theirs as well if this case goes against Yahoo.
I'm sure that this woman is not the first person who has had an ex-boyfriend/husband/lover post nude pictures of them on the net.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
Enter somebody's name, find all known nude photographs of that person. Needn't even be celebrities.
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
... that I had recieved the "Nothing for you to see here. Please move along."
Why post links if they don't work?
so let me get this straight ....if i put naked pics of my girlfriend on yahoo i get rich ? it's worth the risk, she won't be so mad at me when she gets $3 mil (i'll post the profile url soon)
Siropel
Anyone has a torrent? ;)
Someone doesn't have a very high opinion of /.ers!
flossie
Write now. Defend liberty
I can understand she is upset and wants some compensation for the "emotional stress" such an incident might have caused, but... $3 million...are you serious?
(Note: The member profiles have since been taken down by Yahoo)
That won't stop anybody here of course...
where's the mirror?
Share it if you got it!
Tibbon
tibbon.com
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8ABG GK80.htm?campaign_id=apn_tech_up
I tried it, They don't have either profile. No google cache either. :(
Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
anyone have a mirrordot nsfw link yet for her old profile :)
People abuse Yahoo!'s free services?? What a sad, sad day for mankind
You're welcome
Some more information about this incident here.
It's not only with yahoo but in my regional area the majority of social profiles are fakes. Myspace, msn, all of 'em. It seems some twisted individuals have gone to the effort to make up thousands upon thousands of different profiles. Can anyone explain indepth as to why people are doing this?
That's something I'll never understand. If her ex-boyfriend is responsible for that, then he's the one who should be sued.
Only in really extreme cases it's justified to sue a service provider instead (i.e. if they didn't react for months I could see the point).
How is this 'News for Nerds'? Oh wait, maybe the promise of nude pics is the reason! Click away!
'Go for the eyes, Boo, go for the eyes, aaarrrrrrrr!' -- Minsc
This might become the newest husband-wife scam to extort money out of large companies.
Shouldn't she take her anger out on the ex? Sure, Yahoo! should have been (more) responsive to the fact that someone posted nude photos on their profiles but who posted them? Yahoo? I think not!
;)
Besides, how was Yahoo supposed to know that was her in those photos? Did she send them something to compare them to?
But I suspect Yahoo has deeper pockets.
If he'd posted them there, they would still be circulating. See, a distributed, redundant architecture protects you from a single point of failure.
Deleted
Where is it? We wanna see.
This thread is useless without pics.
order prints rofl thats classic
im at work so i cant really view pr0n pics but is she hot?
"This thread is useless without pics."
Big fucking deal. You don't need to be of high moral virtue (whatever that might mean) to deserve sufficient privacy to keep private information off the net.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Suing Yahoo? Isn't it the ex-boyfriend who is to blame for impresonating someone online?
god bless you and god bless her cotton panties and god bless the internet!
From the article: "Cecilia Barnes, 48, in a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Multnomah County."
My eyes thank you, Yahoo!
Yes. Because Nudity and Sexuality is teh immoral.
Welcome to the Morally Infant USA!
Why do I suspect that if the hypothetical "typical woman" were offered a nude modeling job the price tag would be quite a bit less than $3 million? Aside, of course, from the fact that the going rate for nude models is so much lower.
Well, it's enough to get Yahoo's attention even if a jury wouldn't award that much. Gives room to negotiate down to a lower number and still come away with more than legal expenses.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Yeah, because we all know morals are firmly based on whether you've taken a nude picture before...oh wait...
You might want to ad that that link is not exactly safe for work...
Cute? Ralph.
Of course, if she had just used a DMCA takedown notice - since she appears in the photographs, she has a copyright interest in them - Yahoo would probably have jumped and quickly locked out the offending accounts.
But this makes little sense to me, shouldn't she be sueing her ex-boyfriend instead? From my point of view yahoo is only providing a public space.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/ccb9832001/
What's wrong with a couple taking nude pictures of each other, or themselves, for their mutual enjoyment? I fail to see the immorality.
It's not her fault her ex took the low road out, is it?
I'm glad the sole skill of nerds on the internet is as modern day treasure hunters of porn.
... is she hot?
Who really has control of online accounts, and when can others step in?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
It's not like it's considered generally immoral for a person's significant other to have naked pictures of them anyway. It's rather common, really.
What's nasty is releasing them after the relationship is over. That's low.
In America, responsibility is assigned based on who has the biggest bank account.
..a big issue. Who isn't to say that she created the profile, put the pictures up, had those chats, and is now "offended" when yahoo wont take down the profile at her request. She then promptly sues yahoo for a slick 3 million, which I know will be a lot less on her end, but still, it's a lot of money. The "boyfriend" gets off scott free. I hope that in the proceedings, if there are any, that she has to at least prove that this ex-boyfriend did do this.
Sorry ahead of time for being so blunt...
But you are a dumbass if you modded the previous comment +1 Insightful...
Why is Yahoo only at fault here? Why isn't she suing her ex-boyfriend?
Because we all know that morality is strictly tied to nudity.
Jackass
...she's 48!
If this lady's main goal was to get the pictures down (in hopes no one would see them), the last thing she should do is sue Yahoo for $3 million. NOW EVERYONE and their dog wants to see these expensive photos.
Didn't she know Slashdotters would eventually learn of this exciting prOn treasure hunt challenge?
Gentleman, start your SEARCH ENGINES!!!
Authority questions you. Return the favor.
The chances of this going to trial are mathematically indistinguishable from zero. The $3E6 number is just a starting point for negotiating a settlement, whose terms will (as always) be undisclosed.
How much influence this would have on MSN and others, given that outcome, is speculative but I doubt that it materially affects their plans.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
The article is about nekkid pix, so you shouldn't be surprised when you see her unclothed! Dumbass.
And thats why most /.'ers dont have any relationships.
who knows when a disgruntled boyfriend will post one's nudes (and pubes) on the net.
Wanted : A Signature.
if your sig other takes pics of you they are going to keep them even after you split.. if you never wanted them getting out then well don't let the pics be taken.. i see her point about yahoo being lazy .. but what about her filing charges aginst her ex.. i mean impersonating a person and almost ident theft.
there needs to be another side to this..
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
1 million dollars per degree of hotness, so that should make her a 3 / 10.
The fact that someone allows their partner in a committed relationship to take nude pictures of them and trusts said partner not to share them is not evidence of low moral standing. It's evidence of kindness - he wanted pictures of her because they gave him pleasure, and she agreed to let him have said pictures. And, at least according to her story, he repaid her kindness by publicly humiliating her.
It's sad that she trusted someone who was not trustworthy, but this is evidence of his lack of ethical standards, not her lack of morals.
Of course, all we have here is her story - it could be that this whole thing is a setup to get some money out of Yahoo - but there's no reason to assume this based on what we know. If it did happen as described, I think she has a legitimate complaint both against Yahoo and against her boyfriend.
That's a good way to make a bunch of money via frivolous lawsuit.
1. Have significant other take nude pics of you
2. Post on a bunch of different image hosting services that have enough income to make suing them worth while
3. Profit!
In all seriousness, I think it is the boyfriend who needs to be sued and possibly have criminal charges brought against. How is yahoo supposed to know that the girl actually did break up with the boyfriend, and that the whole deal wasn't a scam? It's true that yahoo should have taken down the pictures in a more timely manner, but I think the main legal target should be the boyfriend.
People present themselves at her doorstop to have sexual relationships with her, and she actually complains about this? Would I have women often knocking on my door to have sex with me, complaint would certainly not be my instinctive reaction.
This is harrassment pure and simple. What's happening is that fucknuts have turned anonymity on the net from a place for dissidents to express political thought to a place for criminals to play willy nilly. Whether it's for fraud, spam, harrassment, whatever - it doesn't matter. Congress and law enforcement if and when things get bad enough. I'm beginning to wonder if 'net anonymity is worth it. *sigh* (very distressed at the crazies out there in 'net land) --M
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
I've said it before, I'll say it again. You better have perfect trust in a person if you want to allow that stuff out there and you are going to get offended. It's just like Paris Hilton's video, or any of the countless other ones out there. I just can't believe that they don't think there is a risk of that. "oh, he won't release them"... bullshit.
If you walk into the middle of traffic, you are relying on the good graces of drivers to not hit you.
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
I doubt much of anything will come of this. Since she is the model in the images, she was not the photographer and therefore has no claim to the images whatsoever. Since she is merely going for their removal, she was more than likely a willing participant in the photo shoot.
That being so, while it may be embarassing for her to have to deal with those images getting out, that is the risk you take when you engage in that behavior. She was supposed to think of the consequences before she agreed to be photographed.
The boyfriend might be open to criminal charges depending on if Oregon has laws against posting pictures of that nature without the consent of the individual(s) modeling for the shot. Or he might be liable for inciting harassment on either a criminal or civil level.
I hope Yahoo stands their ground on this one. This woman made her bed, now it is time to sleep in it.
Anonymous Cowards generally receive no replies because you're a coward and I'm a bitch
He didn't have the $3M, maybe.
If there is a guilty party, it's the boyfriend. Yahoo! only provides the space that anyone can use for pretty much anything within the law (i.e. no child pornography). You can't sue the city if your ex-boyfriend pastes your photos on power poles. Besides, Yahoo! took them down. Yet another sue-happy, greedy gold digger.
I think she will have a hard time with this case, proving that she didn't do exactly that.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I don't see too many nude pics of Mennonites online (just an example).
And I'm not saying it's wrong, just that it likely isn't going to help her win a jury over based on sympathy for her.
_______
I just wish I could c:\format Internet
She's not into that sort of thing. Perv.
By "previous comment" I meant the parent, not my other comment ;)
"..she's 48!"
I'd hit it
It's the same AP story.
Pictures taken in the privacy of your own home is one thing and posting them on the Internet is another thing. My and my ex- messed around too on ocassion, but when we broke up I deleted them along with everything else related to her. This is despite the fact that we broke up because she cheated on me, so I had every reason to be mad at her (which I am... that slut!)
But violating her privacy is not a line I'm going to cross.
Here's an excerpt:
It doesn't mention drunk driving, but surely someone has sued the DOT after getting hit by a drunk driver. (Disclaimer: I only skimmed the article. It is one of many I found after doing a google search on Department Transportation lawsuits, inspired by your statement.)
Note: I'm not saying one should sue the DOT after getting hit by a drunk driver. Nor am I agreeing with your implication that these are similar, since Yahoo didn't just host the pictures - they did not take down the pictures when asked to do so. A closer analogy (but still flawed) would be suing the bartender who continued to serve the drunk driver even after he was noticeable drunk.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
There's no such thing as a stupid question... only stupid people who ask questions.
he wanted pictures of her because they gave him pleasure,
:)
for all you know she wanted the pics to be taken because they gave *her* pleasure, don't be sexist
-- the cake is a lie
and archive.org goes down as a million people try to find a backup...
to sue her boyfriend instead of yahoo, but apparently it's the smell of money. Now it's like suing the car manufacturer instead of the bad driver who struck your car.
Forget civil court for now, there has to be something she can file criminal charges for. Defamation of character, sexual harassment, stalking, any number of things. Then, while he's locked up, trying to make bail, you serve the civil papers as well.
If she didn't do any of that, her rights to go after anyone else should be forfeit.
How come she is suing Yahoo instead of (or in addition to) pursuing her ex-boyfriend? Perhaps because Yahoo has the deepest pockets -- which I find extraordinarily lame.
Perhaps Yahoo could have been more responsive, but it it thait fault that this whole thing happened? I tend to think not. That would be like suing Slashdot (instead of me) because I posted something libelous about you. Like I said...lame.
-Turkey
Why isnt she suing her ex-boyfriend instead of yahoo?
Since you asked...
www.voyeurweb.com
Free to view most of the sections, and loads of examples of this going on every week.
http://shinyfeet.com/ in the photo gallery
Looks like the Wayback Machine never archived 'em, either. Hrmph.
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
...something smells like a scam here.
BF: "How can we get rich, honey?"
GF: "Take nude photos of me, then we 'break up'."
BF: "...and..."
GF: "Then you post them at Yahoo membership profiles..."
BF: "...and then..."
GF: "And then I gently ask Yahoo to take them down - if they take too long, we sue for..."
BF: "$1000 ?"
GF: (in a Doctor Evil imitation) "Three mill-eeee-own dollarz!!!!"
BF: *scrambles for the digital camera*
Authority questions you. Return the favor.
1) Install airport screeners that can see through clothes
2) Post on Yahoo
3) Profit!!
SYS 64738
And shouldn't be making pronoucements as if I am. However, I really do think what that guy did is eggregious and he should be punished to the legal extent possible. Also, I'm getting fed up with anonymous criminal fuckwads who are ruining it for the responsible folk. --M
They provide a service. If a court ordered them to take the photos down, they'd do it right away. They aren't responsible for what other people do with the web space any more then a Bar is responsible for drunk driving.
But they just have this woman sending in e-mails. She should have sued her ex-whatever instead.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
We have to see the picture to cause the emotional distress. Unless we see the picture, the plantiff has no right to sue. Show us the damn freaking picture, NOW!!!!
Big fucking deal. You don't need to be of high moral virtue (whatever that might mean) to deserve sufficient privacy to keep private information off the net.
This is true, but it seems weird to let loons take and run around with nude pictures of you and then blame a third party for hosting the pictures. I'd say that unless she has a written contract with the ex-boyfriend about those pictures, she doesn't have any privacy rights over those photos.
Of course, even if Yahoo is legally allowed to leave the photos up, the polite and kind thing for them to do is to take them down promptly.
IANAL.
I think a good question to be asking in this case is who, legally, has ownership of the pictures. I would be very shocked if there was not some way to claim that they are an artistic work, and as such, are protected under some form of copyright law.
Sounds like a customer service issue. Yahoo is getting what it deserves: I wish you could do this to every company that is non-responsive to customer requests...
And, as we all should know by now, Morality is only about sex and the visibility of body parts. You're a Republican, aren't you?
OTOH, I didn't have strange men showing up at my workplace, expecting nookie. In her case, not only her privacy was compromised, so was her personal safety. Her business probably experienced severe disruption from these incidents as well, and it woudn't surprise me if her employers had threatened to fire her over these incidents. Had one of the men turned violent, there might be a coroner's report instead of a lawsuit. In this case, I think that a figure of $3 million, while possibly excessive, is probably justified.
(The articles don't mention whether or not her ex was named in the suit, though, and he probably should be. Maybe Yahoo will turn around and hit him with one as well.)
Doing my level best to piss off the religious right wing...
The degree to which they're a profit center vastly exceeds the risk.
I've known some very attractive 48 year old, and even 50 year old women. Wait till you're that old, and suddenly you'll note that it's not age that makes the difference, it's how well they take care of themselves (And you yourself).
;-)
Unless of course you're planning on not having sex after 40? (of course that assumes you're having sex now
Um, ya, because, after all, one can easily identify a Mennonite with their clothes off.
P.S. What the fuck are you smoking?
http://www.revengeworld.com/ (NSFW, obviously)
BIG disclaimer on the website, and they actually listen to people asking to take their photos down.
and let me clarify, regardless of whom decided to take whose pics, IMHO those pics are 'joint' property of the couple (whether or not they have split up) so unless *both* people agree it's a big no-no for either of them to show them around.
If yahoo didn't comply with her request(s) to take them down she's quite right to sue in my book, in this type of situation I think the policy should be 'take them down right away and figure things out later'. I would also sue the guy as well, although I'm not quite sure exactly if it's even legally feasible to do so.
-- the cake is a lie
The server is down. Got a mirror?
and then after you login they are in the file manager: http://shinyfeet.com/ I could not see them through the demo account
Pubic policy. Very nice indeed.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
If it did happen as described, I think she has a legitimate complaint both against Yahoo and against her boyfriend.
What duty does Yahoo owe her? Did the boyfriend take the picture and own the copyright? What type of agreement exists between her and Yahoo? If you can point out a legal requirement that Yahoo has to follow, I'm sure there is a way to force them without claming a 3 million dollar lawsuit.
I'm waiting for creditcards.google.com.
You type in somebody's name and it returns a complete list of their credit card numbers with expiry dates.
Or alternatively, you type in a large number, and click I'm Feeling Lucky, and it returns you a card with that number as the limit.
They might need an I'm Feeling VERY Lucky button for credit cards with 6 figure limits.
How was yahoo to know that this woman who was contacting them the person in the pictures and on the account. Sure you can easily get someones email address, fire off a letter to yahoo and have someone else's things messed with. Problem is with most things online theres no definite way to know who you are talking to. I dont want anyone emailing yahoo to have them take my photo's down because they don't like them.. Personally, IMHO they should have done as suggested before and suspend the account until all information had been recieved.
~~"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~~Dennis Miller
If you appear in a recognizable form in a photograph, you have a stake in that photograph. In fact, if you take a picture of another person, you cannot use the picture commercially unless you have a model release. There are exceptions for news organizations.
All Yahoo had to do to avoid risk was to just take down the profiles the very same day they received the letter, and block those user names forever. If the boyfriend creates new ones and the problem re-occurs, then Yahoo would track where these postings were from and block that ISP from creating new profiles temporarily until that ISP tells Yahoo that the offending user has been cut off.
Where Yahoo's real risk is at, is by being understaffed. Most likely no one read this. I'd even bet they haven't even read the lawsuit against them, yet.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I'd think the party she SHOULD be suing is the ex-boyfriend. It seems he's the most responsible as far as causing any damages to her or her employer.
I'm assuming Yahoo has more money than the ex-boyfriend, and that's the reason she's doing this.
lol.
Of course, the mennonites have some awsome pornographic wood carvings. *nods*
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
WTF? Because she took nude photos with her ex-boyfriend, now she is of "low" moral standing? Give me a break, I don't think morality has ANYTHING to do with what she does or doesn't do in her bedroom.
Mod this idiot down to hell, please!!! Wish I had mod points right now.
They're at fault for not removing them when asked. If they would've taken them down right away then everybody is happy and they all go home smiling. It's analogous to walking into a department store and seeing a 10 foot print of your naked flab hanging on the wall. Are you trying to say that it should not be the store's responsibility to remove said offensive poster and rather the tool that hung it up? That's ridiculous. This lady tried to get those profiles removed for three months. She had people showing up to her work for sexual liasons. Hell yes Yahoo is responsible for that. AND the dirtbag boyfriend
Simply appearing in a photo does not signal consent for public release. I strongly disagree. I think you are categorically wrong not only ethically, but also legally (in most states). However, I am not competent to judge the legal matter, and the ethical matter is simply my opinion. --M
Anyone know? I'm just curious. Someone must have them recorded online somewhere...
I'm all for Yahoo taking them down upon request, but in filing a $3M lawsuit, with all the media and everything, I think we at least deserves to be able to look at them.
Just do a google search: Cecilia Barnes oregon
Wonder how many phone calls she will get.
savethedollhouse.com
The way that court case broke was a pretty staggering example of the incompetence of McDonalds' lawyers combined with a long history of similar situations that were very specific to their business. In particular, the cavalier and extremely arrogant attitude of the company toward this woman, and toward a whole bunch of other similar cases, caused the punitive damages to be high -- so that they amounted to the amound Micky D's makes in a couple of days' worth of coffee profit, IIRC.
Like it or not, the kneejerk reaction you had, which everyone else had including me, turns out to have completely failed to convince a jury in a trial. Gee, I wonder if everyone just went crazy, all at once. Or maybe there was more to it than that. DUH.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
She could have gotten Yahoo to act much faster on this by putting the takedown demand on RIAA or MPAA letterhead :-)
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I doubt much of anything will come of this. Since she is the model in the images, she was not the photographer and therefore has no claim to the images whatsoever. Since she is merely going for their removal, she was more than likely a willing participant in the photo shoot.
Do you have any references to back up that assertion? I've spoken with quite a few models and model photographers, and my understanding is you cannot legally sell or publish unless the model permits it. This is usually via a Model Release form signed by the model and the photographer.
To have nude pictures of yourself THESE days... you get what you deserve. I can't believe that people are still "outraged" when nude pictures of themselves show up on the web...... Yeah, her boyfriend is responsible for posting an unauthorized webpage, but she is just as responsible for probably providing him with the photos...even if they were stolen. You should have been SMARTER, not to have had someone take nude pictures of yourself!
I think her boyfriend should go to jail.
I was soo embarrassed when I showed up at her office wearing nothing but a trenchcoat, expecting to have some fun and she said no.
That is the most self-serving bunch of tripe I've read this year.
McFact: 185 degrees is the proper temperature for coffee, not a problem to be solved.
McFact: Some other restaraunts had it 20 degrees lower out of fear of lawsuits and at the expense of the coffee's taste.
McFact: McDonalds refused her original claim not because they were being jerks but because if they admitted fault, they would be open for even more lawsuits.
McFact: Lack of personal resposibility is ruining many of life's experiences for everyone.
-Ryan C.
http://us.f2.yahoofs.com/users/41d23957z67b150b5/c cb4play/__sr_/875d.jpg?pfcJ2lCB5_QXwLm6
The issues of who owns accounts, how they are handled when someone dies, and whether a host is responsible for verifying information in a public listing, have simply not yet been addressed, even though the web is 13 years old.
Serving your airship needs since 1995.
OK kids, here's the deal.
None of these links work.
Yahoo has yanked ALL of them.
Unless someone mirrored them and is posting them elsewhere, you can consider these pics effectively removed from the Internet.
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
http://forumpics.info/Yahoo-pics/
:)
Didn't get but the thumbnails, but they are good enought o see what's going on.
Pretty Pictures!
no but you damn sure need to be smarter than let someone take naked pictures of you in that situation ;)
Get paid to code OSS
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
Next, on "Blackmail", we play "Stop the film".
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
After this lawsuit, no matter who wins, you'll be able to get anybody you don't like kicked off of Yahoo by claiming that their profile contains your personal information, because Yahoo's "react to no emails concerning fraudulent use of private information" policy will quickly turn to a "react to any and all emails concerning fraudulent use of private information, to avoid another lawsuit" policy quite promptly.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Agreed. Grandparent is a jerk.
Oh dear, now look what you've gone and done!
Yeah and ALL coffee snobs go to McDonalds for their primo quality, top-notch, perfect temp soffee, right? Seriously, that stuff is swill at any temperature.
Not in a paper cup it isn't.
Yes. It is. If you can't handle it, you shouldn't leave your bubble.
I demand that slashdot remove your post! I demand it!
Hmm... it's not being removed. GIVE ME 3 Million dollars!!
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
A freind of a friend put this together last year - it only gives you the sites google thinks are unsafe.
http://www.monzy.org/unsafesearch/
You are so right.
It's funny, congress and the states rushed in all these criminal laws to cover crime "on the internet" or "on a computer" when there was really no difference (except that business wanted more stuff criminalized and higher fines/damages). But when you have a legitimate issue like this, it just festers.
I agree with the poster who pointed out that one of those men coming to her place of employment could have become violent. If she had died, we would have outrage, rather than this "Yahoo isn't responsible" whining.
Yahoo SOP has to change.
I hate people like grandparent who try to justify the lawsuit, its makes me sick. Recently i stayed at a hotel, the shower hot water was luke warm at best,when i asked management about it and they said it was due to insurance reasons(scalding) the water had to be set at that temperature. People need to start taking responsiblity for their own actions. Putting a hot cup of coffee isn't the most intelligent thing to do. Having 800 got injured which may seem like a large number, but consider they sell millions a day.
Have you ever been to a turkish prison?
That post was not personally injurious to you.
Church of Scientology does this all the time, famously, with Slashdot, but also many many other cases.
I like music
This is bad news for us boyfriends. You know how rich guys want prenuptial agreements?
What kind of red tape am I gonna have to go thru now to get the proper media of my woman to use when she goes on that long business trip?!?!?
Jesus Christ, I'm probably gonna have to agree to castration or some other form of fundamentalist punishment if the stuff ever leaks to the public.
Jesus saves....And takes 1/2 damage.
The best part if this is, had she not sued these pictures would have faded into internet obscurity. Now everyone and their grandmother can see them.
(Yes my grama is watching them with me.)
It doesn't say in TFA, and IANAL, but if I had to guess I'd say that the bulk of the damages sought in this case are punitive, meaning that they're intended not to cover any actual expense or loss, but rather to punish and discourage Yahoo!'s response (or lack thereof). If I understand correctly, a judgement including punitive damages can often be mitigated by demonstrating improvement. That is to say, if Yahoo! changes their policies and becomes more responsive to cases like this, they will probably avoid paying the bulk of this figure.
I can see it now Yahoo! Porno. I wonder what kind of member profiles they'll be showing?
/. CmdrTaco's profile? And what kind of tacos does he command?
Is
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Yahoo's customer service is absolutely horrendous. I've emailed them a number of times on various issues and have never received a response from them. I hope they lose this battle. Maybe it will wake them up to the fact that they should actually be paying attention to their users for a change.
A community-oriented lyrics site
Someone sent this to me in another forum for this news story.
p g
:P
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/mitaiwan82/kitchen.j
My thoughts exactly
The Property of One's : "The Oneitude is directly proportional to the Colditude of the one." - S.B.
So exactly how did she identify herself? What if she was simply trying to remove somebody else's pictures... how would Yahoo have verified it. Better to go through an agency such as the police etc to get a legal takedown notice...
On the other hand, this sort of thing can happen in many ways. Alt.binaries.pictures.erotic.girlfriends on the newsgroups is filled with "ex-girlfriend" pictures from snubbed boyfriends... and once you've been downloaded by a few thousand newgroup users those pics aren't dissappearing anytime fast.
"Trying to get pictures off the internet is like trying to remove pee from a pool" is a good analogy"
Actually if I remember correctly the Dr. Ann lady person a few years ago lost her case vs. hustler for publishing and profiting off of nudes taken of her by an ex when she was younger. So, you are absolutely correct you shouldn't let loons have your nude pics or if you are truly concerned about it then don't take nude pics of yourself. Also, it is not Yahoo's job to know if the woman was serious or if she was just faking the identity of the person in the photos.
Please tell us what brand of coffee you drink.
McDonald's coffee is pretty decent when taken from a fresh batch.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
Her ex-boyfriend posted them along with her contact info in an attempt to hurt her. That woman's hair doesn't look like the other pictures, I assume his intent was to make people think that was her with a picture he found somewhere else.
Heck, if she'd posted this to /. in the first place, we could have taken down Yahoo all by ourselves.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
It does bring up a valid point, and many others have commented on it already, but how many girls have let their boyfriends take nude pics of them? I know a few wives, and husbands, but no boyfriend/girlfriends.
They were probably sitting around the house one day after posting the pics, and started thinking, "What if we were broke up? Yahoo wouldn't know. We could sue them."
...long period of silence...
Man suddenly jumps up, "Honey! I've got an idea..."
Or better yet you agreed to pose naked and then got upset about it when people saw the photos?
Where is it a law?
Is it an amendment?
Did she get fired as Miss America from this?
howd you figure that out?
btw, boobs? what boobs?
Are you the guy that posted these pics? I hope you rot in prison.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
If the photos don't exist in the first place, then they cannot be put on the internet.
This is common sense and worked well into the middle 1990s.
McFact: 185 degrees is the proper temperature for coffee, not a problem to be solved.
McFact: McDonalds made it a choice to brew, store, and serve their coffee beyond the normal 185F. The manual in the 80s listed 195F. Rather than using thermometers they turned up the heat to boiling and turned it down a notch resulting in a pour temp of over 195F, into sealed styrofoam mugs.
McFact: 185F coffee does not cause 3rd degree burns. 2nd degree burns are possible. Surgery and skin grafts are not required for normal coffee spills.
McFact: They were aware of the problem but refused to turn down their pots just a notch.
McFact: A reasonable restaurant, whether big chain or small fry has insurance, and so long as you provide photographs will pay for reasonable damages and even offer a small amount of pain and suffering.
Best example. I had deep fried oysters at Ivers... and broke a tooth on a pearl. I spit out the pearl and tooth fragments and filed an accident report. They agreed to pay the dental bill and offered a small amount for suffering. McDonalds refused to pay medical expences and got sued.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Get your facts from the court documents and findings. There was clear evidence of contributory negligence on the part of McDonald's, and the court punished them for it. Note also that the court found both parties responsible (that is, both Stella Liebeck and McDonald's), so your "no personal responsibility" spiel can go suck it, as far as this case is concerned.
From your source, the woman was seeking $20,000 to cover her medical bills, but McD only offered her a measly $800.
And, the woman received $160,000 in compensatory damages plus $480,000 (i.e. 3x compensatory) in punitive damages.
Why is it relevant that she is from Oregon? Would it have been different if she were from Illinois? Or New York?
I wouldn't mind you in my head, if you weren't so clearly mad -Lews Therin Telamon
HERE
then click on the picture album.
posting anon so she doesn't sue me too.
Think of this scenario:
Yahoo takes down photos upon request. Ex creates new profiles and posts photos. She requests Yahoo to take them down, which Yahoo complies. Ex creates some more.
At some point, she has to sue the ex or get the police to charge her ex-boyfriend with a crime. The court can prevent the boyfriend from doing it again.
Also, how does Yahoo! know that she is telling the truth? Or that she is even the person in the photo?
What kind of red tape am I gonna have to go thru now to get the proper media of my woman to use when she goes on that long business trip?!?!?
Try this: Use a Polaroid camera, NOT digital. Physical photo prints are easier to keep under control. And she gets to take photos of YOU and keep those (she might enjoy that anyway). That might warm her to the idea. If you go all psycho later and start to mess with her, she can post your photos on gay sex websites, under the pseudonym "HairyBearseeker23". And of course with all photos of this type, you'd both have to be careful not to lose or misplace them.
This sort of thing can be a lot of fun for couples but you have to exercise some common sense and data security, and trust each other not to abuse the images.
Freedom: "I won't!"
Seattle's Best is superb... Starbuck's is OK but yuppie to the point I won't let anybody see me drink it. Costco has some decent beans(don't grind them there!). McDonalds is WAY on the low end of the totem pole. As an aside: many people go for a darker coffee like Columbian when they want a powerful "pick-me-up" however, although the darker beans have stronger flavor, the light beans (french, for example) contain more caffeine. Oooh... I hope I get modded informative
..although i dunno how long my server will withstand the slashdotting haha. if anyone wants to mirror this and reply that's fine by me (as soon as my server passes the 9mb/ps range, i'm gonna kill the image)
the album on the left had about 50 pics in them. yahoo was yanking them right when it loaded for me (i managed to see all the thumbs but no larger pics). judging from the thumbs though, i dont think most people would WANT to see the larger pics.
LINK NOT WORKSAFE: web albums
(Note: The member profiles have since been taken down by Yahoo).
I wonder if they were taken down due to the lawsuit or due to too many hits after the Slashdot article was posted?
Gas stations always have a message: For a good time call (###)###-####
God spoke to me.
http://vadersmith.ytmnd.com/
Some where in this thread I noticed the URL for a revenge site, however I can't seem to find it. Does anyone have that URL?
Holy horse poop, Batman!
Someone please take pictures of me and post them on MSN so I can sue them for 3 million.
I'll send 3 mails to spam@msn.net over 3 months and see if they respond in a timely fashion.
Call them? Of course not.
Prolly not... Yahoo! has slightly better lawyers than your average 9 year-old who downloads 3 Britney Spears songs and gets sued for 900 bazillion. :P
Error: No error occurred
Would anyone be surprised if the images appear on T-Shirts (ala Zero Wing)? Flash animations?
It's okay to take that picture down now (NSFW).
OMG! She's underneath the family dog giving it a lube and oil change service! How sweet is that! I bet her next boyfriend is going to love the knowledge of that. She better keep up the kink from now on, or someone's pooch will feel left out. It just wouldn't be right for the next relationship if she doesn't take care of man and his best friend!
I wish I could just format jued0001...
*sigh*
Seriously, for being a troll post, this thread is out of control. Either the original poster is a moral infant, or they're uptight... or they're just trying to get everyone's panties in a bunch. Regardless, I can't believe so many people have posted similarly assinine comments.
...you insensitive clod!
Actually, as a celebrity she has less privacy rights than the rest of us, as she can be considered 'newsworthy'.
Now, that having been said, one of the best ways to protect your rights: don't become a celebrity. Very easy to do; celebrities aren't frequently created by accident.
My 229 is all the Sig I need http://thegunwiki.com/
MOD PARENT UP
This is the reason Tom Cruise always bangs mid 20's chicks...
They dont look like that !
[I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
when my ex-girlfriend put my pic up there in a ad for a gay adult entertainment resume. LOL I thought it was rather funny actually, but don't tell her that!
the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
If I put pics of the goatse man on /., can he sue too? :D
eTrade SUCKS
The smartest thing to do, when you're pictures are on the internet..
.. is to at least get them offline as discretely as possible.
So noooo suing for 3 million dollars!
Who is to say she didnt post them and SAY the boyfriend did.
Ah, I see you've learned the Chewbacca defense!
(Note: The member profiles have since been taken down by Yahoo).
Not including that bit of information could have /.'ed Yahoo!.
"Live free or don't."
its a commercial email service
MOD UP PLEASE
McCoffee gains new status as a weapon of bodily destruction.
Ok, there, happy?
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
If a yahoo customer posts your social security number and bank account information, and you ask them to take it down, and they refuse, do you have a right to sue them? What about your medical records? What about your grades in school?
I'm guessing you said yes, you have a right to sue them if they refuse to take down this private information. So why *don't* you have the right to sue them when they refuse to take down pictures of your private *parts*?
Gibbor Cindy Lauper nude or gibbor me death!
I have no Lesbian Strapon porno movies to distribute for the remainder of this month. I'll be snooping on eDonkey for little petite girls pussy-pounded by well-hung German Shepherd dogs.
Primarily, I want to see pictures taken of Cindy Lauper in the nude. Is she realy a retard, or is she just a tard? Maybe because she is some form of x-tard, she could have extra nipples strategically placed on her eyebrows. Oh Yeah!
Fo' schizzle my stethoscope.
Sincerily, Dr. Dean aDildo, BS, MSH, WD40
Coffee is hot!
Take another look - there are two puns in that sentence. ;-)
I was at pubelix buying some dog food and this skanky woman in a miniskirt with OK legs asked, "is your dog big". When I said, "yes", she asked if he was neutered (he isn't) which I though kind of srange because she hadn't asked what kind of dog he was. Well next thing you know this blind biker in a wheel chair comes rolling buy with about 100 bags of BOGO lays potato chips and a big old Rottweiler 'smelling nose dog'. From the stench, I suspect he was not only blind but olfactorallly challanged. Next thing you know, they are hi-tailing it, literally for the rottie, out of the store together and I'm standing there wondering, "why does this care if my dog is neutered". Thank you slashdot. Now I know and the shudders are almost gone.
The ideal temperature for brewing coffee is just under the boiling point, you want it as hot as possible without "burning" it, something unfortunately not possible at home given the low power of most of our coffee makers, unless you buy a pretty exotic one. It shouldn't be left sitting around long before serving, either.
I realize that it's a false dichotomy since we're talking about McDonald's coffee, but still, there is a tension between having good, fresh coffee on the one hand, and accomodating the amazingly stupid people who can't be expected to hold a cup properly on the other. Most places accomodate the stupid people, since they're obviously a pretty big chunk of the population. But still, it's a shame.
The fallacy here is that you're going to transfer the heat to flesh at all efficiently by splashing the liquid over it, such that the flesh will reach the same temperature as the fluid. Hopefully the average Slashdot reader sees the BS here.
It is really just a shame that our society is being shaped to accomodate the stupid, boring people in so many areas and so many ways. They ought to stay at home where they won't get hurt, eat their TV dinners and avoid sharp objects and dangerous ideas.
We've really dumbed down the definition of "hazardous", haven't we? Stay off those stairs! They are hazardous!
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
You realize that all the people who thought that case was stupid, absurd shit point and laugh at you when you say stupid, absurd shit like that, right?
OMG THEY KNEW THE COFFEE WAS HOT AND PEOPLE COULD BE BURNED!
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
Although the ex was pretending to be someone else, it was still his account. Yahoo shouldn't just shut down someone's account based on the word of another person. She should have gotten a court order to shut down the account.
Vote for Pedro
you can see pics of her at work here: http://www.royalcommercial.com/ and here http://www.royalcommercial.com/contact.html Looks as though the hair matches the hair of the women with the dog... For some reason, I can access the ccb4play yahoo profile in 1 window, but not in any others. Has a pic of her bare chest.
I'm quite sure that these fine upstanding "Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio, medical malpractice, wrongful death, auto accident and personal injury attorneys and lawyers dedicated to vigorously representing the injured" don't have an axe to grind.
Oh, you mean the lawyer with the 89 IQ that said not to worry about non-corporations complaining about Yahoo being a vehicle for privacy invasions? My post was really meant as a funny. Of course in reality they would have seen through the letterhead ruse. But the basis of it being funny is that if it really were a copyright or trademark infringement, I bet they really would have done a takedown in less than 24 hours. But let it be a non-corporation, which they perhaps assumed would not sue (which obviously comes to pass as a wrong assumption), then don't bother to check to see what is going on.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I'm a Survivor fan, and I heard there was a Jenna Lewis porn tape of her wedding night. Any idea about the story behind this tape, was it released with her consent, or is this another case of an ex causing trouble?
Stop trying to sound smart.
I don't think morality has ANYTHING to do with what she does or doesn't do in her bedroom.
;)
An argument I try all the time on my girlfriend.
http://www.google.com/search?q=+Jenna+Lewis+surviv or+tape&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie =utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:e n-US:official
You mean the way that I'm laughing at you right now?
You are a moron.
This is a little off topic, but really happened to me one time at a Burger King... I pulled into the drivethrough at a Burger King in Jackson, Mississippi at the end of Countyline road. I specifically remember this location is/was right beside a Good Year tire store and a Radio Shack. Anywho, I was very tired from working a long day and pulled through the drivethrough and place my order for a cheeseburger and other associated garbage food. I remember that I was exceptionally hungery and eager to bite into that flamekist beef. Usually I would have it my way and customize the burger, but in light of my extreme hunger, I chose the default build of the burger. I pulled up to the first window and handed off my money and collected my change from an extremly intelligent lifeform before moving ahead to the next window. After pulling up to the window to collect my meal, I noticed how warm the bag was and could smell the charred beef smell from the window. Oh how yummy this is going to be! Pulling away from the window, I thrust my right hand inside the paper bag and pull the wrapped delicacy from the bag. I roll the car forward to the exit and unwrap one side. The burger is warm and must have come right off the grill! Pulling into the road I shove approximately 25% of the burger into my mouth and bite down, immediately scalding the roof of my mouth on a (boiling) hamburger sliced pickle. To sum it all up: I was pissed! Apparently the dumbass mirowaved my burger and I went inside and cussed some Burger King employees out; however, I didn't ligtigate. Maybe I am the real dumbass.