Smearing Toddler Reputations Via Internet: Free Speech Or Extortion?

retroworks writes "Crystal Cox, a Montana woman who calls herself an 'investigative journalist,' was slapped with a $2.5-million judgment last year for defaming an investment firm and one of its lead partners. Cox had taken control of the Google footprint of Obsidian Finance and its principal Kevin Padrick by writing hundreds of posts about them on dozens of websites she owned, inter-linking them in ways that made them rise up in Google search results; it ruined Obsidian's business due to prospective clients being put off by the firm's seemingly terrible online reputation. After Obsidian sued Cox, she contacted them offering her 'reputation services;' for $2,500 a month, she could 'fix' the firm's reputation and help promote its business. The Forbes Article goes on to describe how she tried to similarly leverage attorneys and journalists reputations. Finding some of her targets were too well established in google rank to pester or intimidate, Cox moved to family members, reserving domain names for one of her target's 3-year-old daughter. Forbes columnist Kashmir Hill makes the case that this clearly isn't journalism, and establishes a boundary for free speech online."

Comments

Re:I think the key...

[Caerdwyn]

Fine her? How about "jail her for extortion" and "seize everything she owns under RICO"?. Last time I checked extortion and racketeering were felonies. She's just damned lucky that her target didn't decide to settle it with 230 grains of lead (which is, in my not-at-all-humble opinion the only proper way to deal with blackmailers and extortionists, especially when they threaten children like this bitch did).

Freedom of speech does not include freedom to slander.