Slashdot Mirror


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."

9 of 213 comments (clear)

  1. Seems like Libel by bytestorm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is this not libel/slander, which is not protected speech?

  2. I think the key... by Omnifarious · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the key is that she offered to change it all for money. I think that's the part that should be illegal, not posting all that stuff in the first place. And threatening to post it unless you get money should be treated very similarly.

    Lastly, this, in a small way, Google's fault. Their algorithm is fooled by stuff the human curating process would've had a much harder time being fooled by.

    But I don't think we need any restraints on speech to handle this issue.

  3. extortion? by v1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've never seen a case of where extortion was successfully defended by claiming freedom of speech. Anyone have any examples?

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  4. Re:Reserving domain names is now smearing? by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unless there is derogatory content hosted on there with the intent of associating said content with said toddler, I'm not sold.

    From TFA: "Perhaps due to the negative attention, Cox took down the content she had started publishing on the nataliarandazza.com site."

  5. Re:Reserving domain names is now smearing? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But smearing? Unless there is derogatory content hosted on there with the intent of associating said content with said toddler, I'm not sold.

    Normally I would agree with you; however, considering Ms. Cox's prior attempts at blackmailing the child's father (among others, according to TFA), I think it's fair to say that the likelihood that harassment was her intent is pretty obvious.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  6. establishes a boundary for free speech online." by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well duh. That boundary has existed for over 200 years. It's called libel (ruining a person's reputation through the written word).

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
  7. OK, let's get this straight once and for all by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Free speech" doesn't mean "speech privileged from legal consequences."

    I can't keep you from having a website because you're a scuzzy little libeler, but when you *do* libel me I sure as hell can go after you for that.

    Free speech doesn't give you the right to slander someone. It doesn't give you the right to disclose trade secrets, or publish intimate details of private persons' lives. It doesn't give you the right to disclose sensitive national defense information, or incite immediate violence against somebody (Spike Lee needs to learn this).

    What free speech amounts to is the right to say what you have to say then dare the government to do something about it. Surprised? Well, that's freedom for you. It doesn't come without *risk*.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  8. Indeed, this is a non-issue by sirwired · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Right on.

    WTF is up with the inflammatory headline: "Free Speech or Journalism"? Defamation, extortion, and libel is not now, and never has been, any kind of protected speech. It doesn't matter if you do it in your local newspaper, leaflets you hand out throughout the neighborhood, the corner soapbox, or a network of libelous websites.

  9. Re:That's Dumb by CPNABEND · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nope. This is "Nice place you have here... It would be a shame if something happened to it".

    --
    My wife doesn't listen to me either...