Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo! Closes User Created Chat Rooms
karvind writes "Chatmag News reports that Yahoo! has disabled all the User-created Chat rooms. According to Yahoo's chat log page:'The ability to publish user-created chat rooms in the public Yahoo! Chat directory is currently unavailable. We are working on improvements to this service to enhance the user experience and compliance with our Terms of Service'. This may be true but Yahoo! is also facing a $10 million lawsuit that accuses it of cashing in on some disturbing chat rooms. The companies are paying huge fees for their ads to appear on Yahoo!. But many are now canceling those ads because of the report."
On the Internet? Really?
I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
I never thought of Yahoo as the hot chat room spot. No matter how many Yahoo chats or Aol or whatever, the chat place to be will always be IRC, which they'll never shut down and probably always have the most freedom in terms of channels available and content within.
"Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
I know the freedom of speech zealots will cry wolf over this but I'm very glad to see this happen. Although the room names don't imply that something illicit is going on, it would be nice if there was a way to keep kids chat rooms for kids and adult chat rooms for adults. Yahoo has been VERY lax about this in the past and it's good to see them make an effort. Even if it's being forced by a lawsuit.
My sig of choice is Marlboro
Well what did they think was going to happen? Opening up chat rooms to the public with I'm assuming very little moderation is just asking for trouble. The article says people asked to become moderators but Yahoo never responded.
I've never used Yahoo chat before. Do they have very many non user created rooms? Sounds like they just destroyed their chat service.
Now where will all the 14 year old blonde lesbian goth chicks with piercings, and a fetish for cybering do once they clock off from work and head home to the wife and kids... .... so sad. . . soo truely sad it is....
Force of Will = Glue 'nuff said.
They need to monitor their kid. Especially chatrooms.
Yahoo lets any A-hole create any stupid chatroom.
The only problem with Yahoo is that they don't have one single customer service email address. If they do they sure as hole don't listen NOR DO THEY EVER REPLY WITH A HUMAN REPLY EMAIL. So they could give a fuck if Al-queda had a chat room on there.
How many (total) channels were actively run on Yahoo Chat--basically, how hidden were these channels in the first place? Did Yahoo make an effort to police their chat channels, or were they neglected entirely (and thus encouraged to degrade to the point they were at)? Is Yahoo even liable for the actions of other people? Why is congress discussing MORE LAWS when obviously they're being sued so they already (may have) violated existing ones?
I seem to recall similar channels all over the fricking place when I was kid, on AOL. Why was AOL never nailed like this (or was I just too young to care/remember)?
The lawsuit by the family of one child porn victim said Yahoo! could have removed the sites, but instead chose to make money on them.
Oh. Okay. Nice big accusation at the bottom from an anonymous source and no support to follow it. Now that's inciteful writing!
Eh, it looks like the Religious Uptight learned how to astroturf.
DRM = Digitally Restricted Media. This is a viral sig, pass it on.
See kids, this is why you shouldn't use Yahoo, and discover IRC instead.
.. its not good for you, you know.
All this control over your speech
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
Make the gobment do it!!!!!111
Yeah, right.
There are disturbing chat rooms in any chat medium that supports "rooms" as such. However, if my memory serves me right, there used to be a part in MOTD on IRC servers that said something along the lines of "IRC is an unmoderated medium"... If Yahoo is not a moderated place either - who is a judge of what is shocking and what is not? Not that i am advocating sick stuff, and not that i don't see how they (Yahoo) can give in to litigative pressure.. but still?
. there were also lots of arabic rooms that the Al Queada may have been hanging out in, I can't really be sure because most were in arabic font
God bless you sir, for being American.
"There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
How many times did they say CHILD SEX ROOMS in that report. I love how they act like the advertisments were purposely placed on those particular chat rooms.
All Yahoo chat rooms :
joeuser: where are the ladies
joeuser2: HI R U FEM?
adbot: jargonlkjdsfhgnbfoo
adbot2: 25/f/perfect nudexxxpics.sex.ws click here for my pics!
Followed by the hammering of your desktop full of randomly generated adult website advertisments and emails. Things have gotten so bad with the bots that people are relying on 3rd party programs to block the sheer amount of crap that an average yahoo user receives every day.
I'd honestly say a good 30-40% of the "users" in the rooms are adult website advertisement bots. I've spent a few minutes on this comment and I already received at least a dozen bogus IM's / ads from them. The news about companies not wanting to deal with yahoo's obvious chat room problems doesn't suprise me in the least, I say good riddance.
there were also lots of arabic rooms that the Al Queada may have been hanging out in,
Just reading this comment from you is scary. But perhaps not scary in the way you think... It's scary that your first thought about an arabic chat room is as a possible host for "Al Quaeda". Those darned terrorsts are everywhere now, aren't they? And yet 5 years ago you never even knew they existed.
Oh, but because I suggest that perhaps arabic chat rooms are NOT somewhere for Al-Quaeda to hang out, that must make me a terrorist too...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
What they found: people typing words to each other. Shocking!
I don't think so, stuff like...
hi2u, asl? kthxbi
1 4m t3h 1337 winn4r!
can be classified as words...
Let the commencement BEGINULATE!
Not surprising at all...
Microsoft's media portal in australia, "ninemsn" (think msnbc) recently had to explain how it failed to notice its members had set up a "Rape Club" chatroom devoted to discussions a photos of, er, rape.
I just tried to track down a link through google news.
Which (at the moment) leads to a news article on ninemsn (!) Amusingly, follow the link and receive:
"The article you have requested does not exist"
Tinfoil hats ahoy! Instead, try this link to read about the whole sordid affair:
Nah, actually these rooms are getting closed, because the undercover law officers wasted tremendous time and effort fishing for pedophiles in it, for no good. Thing is there IS a line between reality and fiction, and in fiction people will do countless things, including butchering each other in games. But when it comes to reality, there is a little inner voice that goes off, that makes people care about each other. I wonder how many pedophiles they set up who actually treated their bait very very decently and with respect, and stopped the contact after coming to their senses. Like, look, even Michael Jackson got let off, so why waste time fishing for these people if the law will just let them go?
PS. Chatting is a bit impersonal, and because of that it can get rude. If you don't like it, flip the switch off. How many times have you seen people talk really nasty in 3rd person, but when they are face to face with someone, they shape up and behave, and become less offensive? Well in chat the "I" can talk to the "You" as if it were a "he,she,it." Webcams and voice can aid making it more personal, but it's impossible for everyone to voice-talk at the same time the same way as they can type, it'd be a mess. Of course there are two sides to every story, and the opposite is true too, when you get to know someone very well even through "impersonal" means such as letters only. Also I'm sure there were some true pedophiles that stop at nothing, caught. It's always funny when they catch a 50-year old judge or respected person about to meet a 17-year old. I always think of salmon or black widow males. Sex is a funny thing, I tell ya, but without it you wouldn't be here, nor would the little salmons.
Actually if Al Quaeda hung out in these rooms, we should keep them open by all means. Haven't you heard they only talk in person and don't even use cell phones? We got satellites aimed at listening to these people, if they only would speak up. I mean what's better than having them type up their shit in a chat room, and then just run in through some translation program? Free intelligence anyone, without wasting arabic-speaking-undercover-precious-time?
"Yes, more legislation is required. The law has not kept up with this type of criminal activity," U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, told the Houston television station KPRC." With a nod from Gitmo Gonzales ""Short of changes in the law in Congress, we may be limited about what we can do in this area," U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said."
It's yet another shenanigan and publicity stunt by a *Texas Republican* and a Texas local TV station. I resent that the article submitter did not mention that. Not that I ever was fond of the bot-infested Yahoo chat, but the action of those US Talibans reeks of stink; we found something we didn't like on this thing, nevermind that we shouldn't have been looking for it in the first place, so we'll mess it up *ALL*, for all, and let's take a chance and excuse to legislate!
Remember that 'sexy cheerleading' legislation?! I hate those folks; buckle up for their attempts, onslaught after first step, to legislate their morality and force it upon all!
Yahoo has chat rooms associated with their yahoo groups - these are still active. They don't display ads on the way in. Group use ads when you view threads - every n items you read, you get to view (ignore) an ad.
I didn't realize that yahoo also had these ad-hoc chat rooms but that appears to be what's been shut down.
As several other posters have remarked, this kind of adult/child dialog is nothing new. Way back in the day, when CompuServe was master of the on-line universe and a 2400 baud modem was da bomb, I recall watching my 7 yo daughter chatting on-line on night. When I noticed someone say 'would it matter to you if I was a 27 yo male', I pulled the plug on her chat and permanently shut down her access to chat rooms.
While I don't condone pedophilia, PARENTS ARE OBLIGATED TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES HOW THEY WANT TO MANAGE THEIR CHILDREN'S ACCESS TO THE INTERNET. Please do NOT ask the government or buinesses to become the ethics police, that's MY job.
I realize it's damn near impossible, and not very healthy, to monitor your kids 24/7, but teaching your kids right and wrong is what we get paid to do - you pop one out and you get the responsibility that comes with the sex.
Does anyone have any legal pointers to what Yahoo! was obligated to do (if anything)? I've tried looking for info on the relevant US law or case law, but I've not seen anything.
It seems clear that Yahoo! was operating a website in a hands off fashion. Slashdot does the same, right?
I can image a court could hold Yahoo! liable for any bits they serve (ala China or France), but that sounds un-American.
The various articles mention that Yahoo! cannot be held criminally liable. Does anyone have further info?
What about USENET? There's probably tons of illegal stuff floating around on that.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
....did anyone notice that Brawny (paper towels) was listed as an advertiser along with Diet Pepsi? Fat old dudes slurping down a 64oz Big Gulp and vainly attempting to clean the keyboard post chat session...the mind boggles. Now pass the Brawny so I can can clean up the mess caused by blowing my beverage through my nose all over my monitor.
"We herd sheep....we drive cattle...we LEAD people! Lead me...follow me...or get out of my way!" GEN George Patton
So Big Bad Corporation is to blame because it let's users create their own chat rooms. Notice how there's pretty much nothing about those who are creating and participating in those chatrooms. Why blame pedophiles when you can blame The Coporation?
What's next? "Big Bad Corporations banking on the use of baseball bats by the mob"?
Yahoo IM and Yahoo personals have become the EXACT same as their chat rooms - just ways for the sexually perverse,incredibly strange, or overly obnoxious marketer to gain attention.
Yahoo Personals/Yahoo Profiles for instance are about 60% fake - there to be front end or link builders for XXX chat/websites
Yahoo IM has become almost unbearable to be visible with fake "bot-women" IMming me and inviting me to sex cam chats
Yahoo auctions are over 90% fake - just look at the Mac Category - I don't think there are but two out of the 45 auctions that are currently up in the Mac category that are legit.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
Inevitably, these guys are going to come up with legislation that will be impossible to implement. Just like the library net-nanny laws, which are inevitably going to be doomed to "I thought my kid would be safe if I left him at the library for 4 hours while I did my shopping and a manicure!" lawsuits, it's not going to be possible to screen each and every room name in every language created. Especially, if like IRC, they're simply created automatically.
See if you can write a regular expression that will block all of these channels. I'll throw in some easy ones as well as some that require actually knowing the subject matter (if you don't get it, try google and ageofconsent.com):
Let's all have sex with little girls!!!1!
kome ere 2 c lil kitz
young kittens 4 men
t33nz p1><
Jelly Bracelets R us
Chilean Wife pix
tennis player porn
erotaisou na shashin (I see from other posts that yahoo supposedly supported arabic, so they'd probably have supported japanese as well, and in that case you'll have to match all possible combinations of the japanese alphabets that create that concept)
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Chat-room paedophiles are like email viruses - it can easily be stopped but everyone is too stupid. Ok so the paedophiles shouldn't be around in the first place, but that's not the point: bad people _do_ exist and that will never ever change so its about fucking time that parents took some responsibility to stop it at their end. I see no reason why a private chat system couldn't be set up were all users are pre-screened or identified. Its very simple: to join kid-safe-chat.com parents would provide ID such as a credit card or kids could get their school to do it. The kid can then choose whatever screen name they want and the parents wont know it. Chats are monitored/logged but privacy is maintained so that parents/teachers etc can't read the logs or do any monitoring other than what they could do by simply creating their own account (otherwise your kids will just walk right around it). If anyone dodgy gets on they will know that anything they say or do on this chat system can be fully linked back to their real identity.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
When MSN closed their chat services in 2003, where do they think all of the children and pedophiles went? The pedophiles didn't just disappear and the children certainly didn't go back to riding bicycles. All they did was shift the burden of dealing with the problem to other chat services.
If an inappropriate or illegal room appeared on my service I would certainly take action, but there exist private rooms on my service which I do not monitor for privacy reasons. Lawsuits such as the one Yahoo is facing may spell the eventual end for commercial chat services and perhaps even domestically run IRC networks. My personal thoughts on the matter are that chat services should do what they can to prevent such activity but there needs to be a clear line drawn on just what a service can be accountable for. The phone company for example cannot be held responsible for a crime that is conducted or planned over its network.
Like ' Americans for the 2nd amendment '.. or ' people who dislike yahoo's service terms' ...
Somehow I think this is yet another case of 'but its for the children' nonsence.
Yes, i realize its a commercial company and we have no real free speech rights there. But its still somewhat concerning how people toss the concept aside. It *should* be universal.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The intent of my wording was exactally what the constitution would have been designed to protect:
"American citizens, protesting the destruction of the 2nd amendment by the government"
As a side note, the excerpt '..or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..' clearly states we do have the right of free speech as an individual.. The directive that congress is not supposed to abridge it, means we do have it..
The key to a lot of the constition is paying attention 'or', not 'and'.. Rights, in general, are not mutually exclusive, nor modified..
( but i know, we are getting somewhat OT here.. )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Well, regardless of whether 12 year old girls really do or don't visit these types of chat rooms - I think the real issue comes down to advertisers unwittingly having their products tied to rooms with these titles.
As far as I'm concerned, there's really no point or value in trying to make it crime to have such a chat room. Anyone, at any time, can create a "chat room" using one of the instant messenger programs out there, give it this type of "topic" and invite random people to join. Same goes for IRC, where anyone could throw a server online and make any channels they want on it - even if you somehow banned them from using the most well-known/populated IRC servers.
If you don't want your pre-teen chatting with creepy older guys who want sex with them, then a little *education* and *parenting* is in order. Legislation won't substitute.
But there IS a very real and understandable complaint when you, as an advertiser, pay your money for product placement and then your product ends up being placed where you never agreed to the placement at all in your contract.