Slashdot Mirror
Google Cracks Down On Mugshot Blackmail Sites
Google is apparently displeased with sites designed to extract money from arrestees in exchange for removing their mugshot pictures online, and is tweaking its algorithms to at least reduce their revenue stream. From the article at The New York Times: "It was only a matter of time before the Internet started to monetize humiliation. ... The sites are perfectly legal, and they get financial oxygen the same way as other online businesses — through credit card companies and PayPal. Some states, though, are looking for ways to curb them. The governor of Oregon signed a bill this summer that gives such sites 30 days to take down the image, free of charge, of anyone who can prove that he or she was exonerated or whose record has been expunged. Georgia passed a similar law in May. Utah prohibits county sheriffs from giving out booking photographs to a site that will charge to delete them. ... But as legislators draft laws, they are finding plenty of resistance, much of it from journalists who assert that public records should be just that: public."
I'm pretty sure the pictures are considered public domain, in the same way that certain other legal information is. That's assuming that the person really was convicted of the crime and the picture was officially released or otherwise searchable through traditional means.
Otherwise, we'd have constant reports of celebrities filling lawsuits every time one of their mugshots is posted.
It's obviously public domain, but by when require a ransom to take it down, it becomes extortion.
I applaud Google for this move but the solution is for LEO not to release pictures or other personally identifiable information about people who have not been convicted in the first place because doing so can ruin an innocent person's life and innocent people get charged with crimes all the time. On a related note, when Strauss-Kahn got the "perp walk" treatment, many in France were shocked because the practice is banned there to protect the innocent,
I don't think you know how things work.
Even for the simple exercise of free speech and assembly, the order of the day is increasingly "catch and release", often without so much as a ticket for most yet all are routinely fingerprinted and photographed. This was not uncommon all the way back to anti-war protests in the '70s and it's only gotten worse.
Will you seriously contend that exercising basic rights [once-upon-a-time] protected by the constitution makes one a bad person?
Mayhap you presume that anyone arrested is automatically guilty of something and deserving of conviction? Is someone convicted under what is later shown to be bad law also a bad person?
Well, then, carry on, Citizen, the State needs more like you.
This is a real problem. In an age where you can destroy a completely innocent life with a few mouseclicks I'm really surprised there's not been more of an outcry. Its trivial to destroy some one's credit and make them look like they're felons... and complete hell to correct these things.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
Yes, it is simple. Don't do illegal stuff.
And don't be black.
That post was moderated "troll", seriously? And I thought /. was populated with atleast a few thinkers... I defy anyone to make me see the light and explain how that was a troll?
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'