Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Craigslist Forced To Reveal a Seller's Identity

Posted by kdawson on from the limits-to-anonymity dept.

mi writes "The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts has won a judgment compelling Craigslist to reveal the identity of 'Daniel,' who tried to sell two tickets to the Oscar ceremony recently. The plaintiff's argument against such sales is scary and can be taken very far very quickly: 'If you don't know who's inside the theater, it's very difficult to provide security.' Craigslist's handling of the case may be even scarier, however — instead of fighting tooth-and-nail for the user's privacy, as we expect Google, Yahoo, and AOL, and even credit-card issuers to do, Craigslist simply did not show up in court and lost by default."

20 of 314 comments (clear)

  1. Hai Guise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I got two oscar tickets. Anyone want em? Asking $600 OBO.

    1. Re:Hai Guise by ari_j · · Score: 5, Funny

      You must be new here. Moderators can't read the summary just like meta-moderators can't read the comment whose moderation they're meta-moderating. Similarly, editors aren't permitted to read the article.

    2. Re:Hai Guise by HTTP+Error+403+403.9 · · Score: 5, Funny

      They just released Daniel's real name - turns out it is Alan Smithee.

      --
      I'm not a Troll, it's reverse psychology.
  2. Services not found on Craigslist: by halsver · · Score: 5, Funny

    Legal representation

    --
    Roughly half my comments are never submitted. You may be reading the better half...
  3. The perfect place to buy tickets is... by gooseupfront · · Score: 5, Funny

    Craigslist. Not only do you get a great deal on tickets, you get a great deal on a date to go with you!

    1. Re:The perfect place to buy tickets is... by catmistake · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real question is why the MPAA spent the money on lawyers and court costs when the could have just bought the tickets!

      --
      The Admin and the Engineer
  4. Why do the even HAVE tickets? by superdave80 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they want to know who is in the theater during the ceremony (for 'security' reasons... dun dun dun!), why do they even have physical tickets? Why not just a list of who can get in? Do the invitees REALLY have to show a ticket to get in? "Sorry, Mr. Cruise. No ticket, no entry!"

    1. Re:Why do the even HAVE tickets? by Shados · · Score: 5, Funny

      And good thing they didn't. Tom Cruise and "-above-" pretty much includes 95% of the human population.

    2. Re:Why do the even HAVE tickets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've gone to the Oscars.

      When you are invited, you get a packet of various tickets. The tickets could be parceled out from a production company which gets a lot of say, ten of them. Or if you are a nominee, you may be sent them directly via an agent or manager. In the packet of tickets-- one is for the ceremony, another for the "Governor's Ball" afterwards. The Kodak theater has three or four levels inside-- if you are a nominee you have access to the bottom "floor level" and without the appropriate pass you will be kindly asked to stay up top. You also, if I remember right, get some kind of parking ticket that you give when you turn in your car to the valet, or that your limo driver keeps if you've got one of those. I could be wrong about that last part- cant' remember.

      Here are some reasons for the tickets (and not a list): First of all, the list of attendees changes up to the last second. People are planning to go, then drop out, or have other people go in their place... it's a very fluid attendance list and I think it would be pretty difficult to keep it up to date. I'm thinking its much easier to let individuals deal with the politics of who's using the tickets than to try to centralize it. Plus, there would be people BSing to get their names added on the attendant list all over the place if it was as easy as calling in. Sure, tickets can be forged too, but I think they are individually numbered (?) and have glossy rainbow printing and stuff all over them...

      Also-- have you ever seen the red carpet? It's about the width of a city street. Fans on one side holding signs, and the press on the other holding cameras, both on bleachers. The red carpet is fast moving and chaotic. When you go to the oscars, you are part of a 45-minute flow of people who drop off their cars, head through a giant tent-like thing where they take your ticket, then you pass through one of about twelve metal detectors, then proceed through the red carpet. Among the actors and well-known celebrities are the majority-- these include more technical nominees (sound, sfx), producers, writers, etc. And most people-- celebrities and non- bring dates and family. It would be a real pain to ID every single person who passes through, and the flow of people would virtually grind to a halt...

      I suppose they COULD use a list.. but it would be just as much of a cluster fuck I think.

      Hope this helps...

  5. Re:Well it's the court's fault. by TornCityVenz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now they will have to post the judgment in Missed Connections.

    --
    I Need someone to rebuild a Digitech Digital Delay pedal for me....for me...for me...for me.
  6. Re:What did you expect? by EMeta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's the problem. Craig doesn't want a huge organization. He doesn't want ads. He just wants to live semi-comfortably and have a functional website so people can use it.

    Things this does not include:

    Ads.
    Huge profits.
    Legal division.

    Do we really want Craig to have to start putting ads everywhere so he can protect users that do stupid stuff? I don't.

  7. Re:craigslist could use some cleanup? by EMeta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Should Craigslist be forced to pay for lawyers whenever someone posts something they shouldn't on their site? I say no. What did this guy ever do for them? Craig's not making any money off his posting. None. Why should it pay for lawyers for him?

  8. Have you seen the CL privacy page? by johnny+cashed · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.craigslist.org/about/privacy.html

    And look at the terms of use, particularly item 2.

    Was Craigslist expected to not reveal the seller?

    1. Re:Have you seen the CL privacy page? by johnny+cashed · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ok, to be fair, here is the correct link:

      http://www.craigslist.org/about/privacy.policy.html

      The first link I got from the craigslist home page. I thought it was funny that it was 404ed. The correct link I got from the terms of use page.

      However, if you read the correct privacy page, it says this:

      We don't share your information with third parties for marketing purposes.

      I'd say this isn't marketing purposes.

    2. Re:Have you seen the CL privacy page? by smussman · · Score: 5, Informative
      Or, even more explicitly in Section 5:

      Craigslist may disclose information about its users if required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that such disclosure is reasonably necessary to respond to subpoenas, court orders, or other legal process.

      If you look at that, there's really no deal at all. Craigslist is doing exactly what they said they would

    3. Re:Have you seen the CL privacy page? by LandDolphin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This thread of replies should be mod'ed +5 informative. Why is it even news if it is in their privacy policy that they will turn over the information? Reading that kind of makes this a total non-story.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
  9. Re:craigslist could use some cleanup? by thrillseeker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is this Craigslist's problem? There is no requirement that they fight to help you keep your anonymity. If Daniel doesn't like the result of the court's decision, he can hire his own attorney to fight it.

  10. That isn't really the point... by midnitewolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't blame the academy for wanting tighter security, and they have a valid reason for WANTING to know the identity, but security at the Oscars isn't Craigslist's responsibility, and they're not ENTITLED to that identity.

    Forcing Craig's to stop the auction and prevent the sale? Reasonable. I would think that the extent of their liability would be to remove the auction of (what are presumably) non-transferrable tickets. Had they actually shown up in court, they could have had a good shot at protecting the sellers identity.

    There's potential here for an unfortunate precedent.

    1. Re:That isn't really the point... by daveywest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Explain to me why Craigslist would want or bother to pay for the legal defense of someone selling something they have no right to sell?

      Perhaps if this had been an actual privacy issue, Craigs might feel inclined to step up.

      Consider that the Academy has an established precedent of defending its legal rights. Ever wonder why you can rarely buy an Oscar on eBay?

      Also, where does Craigs make any promise of privacy to it's users? The randomized emails they offer posters are just one step above the security provide by lock on your front door. If someone wants to get in there, they're not going through the lock, they're going through the decorative glass window.

  11. conform with the rest of the industry. by OrangeTide · · Score: 5, Interesting

    'If you don't know who's inside the theater, it's very difficult to provide security.'

    Then require people to show ID. Try to do security like the rest of the world. If you can sell tickets and not know who is at the Oscars, then what stops some one from tying up ticket holder and taking their tickets to the Oscars?

    I'm simply do not understand what legal right one private organization has to enforce its policy on a completely unrelated organization?

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire