Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet

What Should You Do When Attacked Online? 96

Posted by Cliff from the how-should-you-defend-yourself dept.
Argylengineotis asks: "Recently, a friend of mine was viciously attacked by an unknown third party over the internet. This is not a typical case of cyber-crime either: the attack is in the form of slander, libel and posting of private information in public forums with the intent of encouraging further harassment. On top of everything, this attack is focused on forcing my friend out of business! Though we suspect certain people of perpetrating this series of crimes, the only way our friend could prove anything is with the resources of certain server logs belonging to the forum where this attack is taking place. This puts the forum in an awkward position, as they don't want to jeopardize their common-carrier status by setting a precedent of forking over server logs when somebody says something someone else doesn't like, be it overly critical or potentially slanderous, and they've referred my friend to their lawyers. My pal's local police force is totally unsympathetic and ultimately incapable of dealing with something like this, and the FBI won't even take a report, because there are no concrete points where there is verifiable damage, just a few mean-spirited posts in an anonymous forum. What, if any, are other possible recourses in a situation like this? Should my friend somehow try to find the money to hire an attorney to try and get the server logs (if they even exist)? Should my friend try and take matters into his own hands, (vigilantism)? Is there anyone we can call or write to that can exert some justice? Or does my friend simply have to resign himself to being the victim of a pretty nasty smear campaign?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What Should You Do When Attacked Online? More

What Should You Do When Attacked Online?

Comments Filter:

  • Subpena the forum for the logs (Score:5, Informative)

    by rjamestaylor ( 117847 ) <rjamestaylor@gmail.com> on Tuesday November 19, 2002 @02:39AM (#4704153) Journal
    People do this to Yahoo and AOL everyday. Unless the company doesn't KEEP logs, then they have them. It won't make the forum responsible for the slander/libel just because they comply with the logs -- the phone company (a real common carrier) turns over logs all the time on subpena without endangering their common carrier status.

    Slander/libel isn't a crime it's an actionable civil offense, where the remedy is financial. Why money? That's all courts can deal in. They cannot restore reputation nor return the goose feathers to the opened pillow (as they say).

    But, a large civil judgement is only possible when (1) the litigant doesn't fight the charge--not what you want to have happen, or (2a) cannot use the unassailable defense of "truth", and (2b) cannot prove they were ignorant of the falsehood of their accusation, and (2c) cannot prove they acted without malice or an intent to cause harm through the false accusations. In other words: libel cases are rarely won, but when they are won (outside of summary judgement) they speak volumes -- especially when the award is high.

    So, in light of libel and slander, you can refute (but who listens? Bad news is exciting), ignore (and appear guilty), or litigate. Just be sure you can make the case.

    Oh, expect it to be expensive.

    • Re:Subpena the forum for the logs (Score:5, Informative)

      by RedDork ( 147298 ) on Tuesday November 19, 2002 @02:53AM (#4704206)
      althought IANAL, I am a law student, and for the most part I agree with rjt's comment. I would add one thing though. This is a tort action (like a car accident) and as such, if there is a real chance of winning a large amount of damages, you will be able to find an attorney who will take this on contingency, i.e. work for free and take a percentage of your winnings. I would recommend opening the yellow pages and finding an attorney in your areas that handles slander/libel cases. You may want to look for one who specializes in cyberlaw/Internet cases, as this one can have some interesting consequences depending on the nature and location of your friend's business, the location of the forum's servers, and the location of his/her attacker.

      The downside of this is that if she doesn't think she can win it, no attorney is going to spend her time and money litigating it, so don't be surprised if your friend is SOL on this one.
      • and I was once a law student. Anyway, Mr Lockwood's position seems defensible in court, but indefensible in a real-world situation. Using IRC harassment as a precedent, weblog harassment is pretty much as safe as downloading pirated software; you are in the clear unless you've done something really extraordinary. Also, the harassment which Mr Lockwood would like to protest occurred on a server which does not even keep actual logs; they keep logs of MD5'ed IPs and shitcan them after two weeks. In light of these facts, it's not hard to tell that without a truly impressive legal team (a la OJ Simpson) the case will not and can not go far, let alone succeed in silencing for any length of time a sea of anonymous cowards armed with information which has entered the public domain.

        In fact I am rather sure this story was posted as yet another dishonorable Ask Slashdot troll.
      • IAAL, and one of the things that they don't teach you in law school is knowing which cases to take, and which ones not to take, on contingency. Libel/slander suits derived from Internet flame wars? Three words: Cash Up Front.
        • The admissability of log data is going to be an interesting issue in law in coming years. Yes, there is precedent for it, but the Johnny Cochranes of the world haven't gotten involved yet. At some point, we'll have to decide whether the ease of typing "vi /var/log/syslog" constitutes reasonable doubt in every case.
    • (2a) cannot use the unassailable defense of "truth"

      Unless you live in Western Australia; 'truth' is no defense to defamation!

    • What a pathetically overly legalistic society we live in these days. The party here may in fact be guilty of libel, slander, or some other offense, but there's something the defamed can do other than sue.

      He can GROW UP and handle some immature bozo who bothers him in online forums like a man. It's an online service, and people know that anything said must be taken *cum grano salis*, particularly when said by someone who's being a jerk via anonymous harassment. If an online kook can cause real damage to this person's business by posting nonsense on online forums, then quite frankly it wasn't much of a business to start with.

      At the risk of being flamed for not jumping to the defense of the wronged party, people really need to grow up and learn that fretting over online kooks causes infinitely more harm than the kooks themselves can usually perpetrate.

      Look at me, for example. As a writer I did investigative journalism into the world of online child pornography, and because I took positions such that the producers of hardcore materials should be more aggressively sought while the downloaders should largely be left alone because the manpower is being wasted, and that Playboy-like softcore materials being produced in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet states are most likely harmless and may serve as a release valve for the sexual desires of borderline pedophiles, I managed to accumulate some kooks of my own.

      Whether one agrees or disagrees with my assessment of the situation after doing legitimate and careful journalistic research by interviewing people involved in the trade of such electronic material, as well as law enforcement and legislative officials, one can probably agree that I wouldn't deserve to be harassed and even threatened online for a very long time. Yet I was, for merely expressing an opinion. One of a few kooks I accumulated followed me around to several different forums, including ones where I used my real identity. Did he cause harm to my reputation? Maybe, but anyone who'd take a kook or troll's commentary to heart is a moron in the first place. Did he cost me online contacts? Again, maybe. Did he threaten me and know my real identity? Yes. Did he post personal information on public forums? Yes. Did he commit libel? Sure. Did I sue him? Of course not--why would any rightminded individual bother?

      What did I do? I stopped responding, went about my business, and he went away. In other words, I acted like a man instead of bringing lawyers into it like a whiny little pussy. Quite frankly, people need to just grow up about such matters instead of fattening the attorneys.

      But most importantly, people should be mature enough not to be bothered by online kooks in the first place. Everyone has enemies. That's just life. Just don't let the bastards get you down. Nothing is as harmful as one's own worries.
      • Did he cause harm to my reputation? Maybe, but anyone who'd take a kook or troll's commentary to heart is a moron in the first place.

        For a journalist, this seems a remarkably naive attitude. Have you never seen the effect of a rumour? The original source may be a known idiot, but once it gets a couple of steps away, people of some standing may start hearing it. Information has a way of getting laundered, like money, and pretty soon "everybody knows" that you put gerbils up your ass or whatever, without anybody really knowing where they heard it.

        Besides, I'm not at all sure that using the law isn't a mature approach. It certainly beats going after the guy with a baseball bat, for instance, even though that's a long-standing manly approach, and it may be more effective than simply ignoring the problem and hoping that it will go away, or at least that he will get bored and move on to someone else. Litigation has a bad reputation, and obviously it can be abusive, but it's also a process of submitting a dispute to a disinterested third party.

        Now me, I've got no reputation to speak of, so don't bother. People already hide their gerbils when they see me. :)

      • Fortunately for you, your attacker was a kook and not a respected authority in your community. I think, however, that don't understand what impact a concerted libel attack can have on not just your own feelings but on others' reaction and prejudice toward you, esp. when the attacking party is held in regsrd as an expert in the community in which you operate.

        Unfortunately I speak with experience in this matter (even personally). That kind of malicious attack cannot be simply ignored if one desires to continue to participate in one's community.

      • He can GROW UP and handle some immature bozo who bothers him in online forums like a man. It's an online service, and people know that anything said must be taken *cum grano salis*, particularly when said by someone who's being a jerk via anonymous harassment.

        Didn't the poster say he was going to lose his business.

        Sounds like you're the one who needs to grow up and realize that not *all* lawsuits are brought by whiny babies. That sometimes, in fact, there is good reason for a court to muzzle a defendent and fine him for his actions.

        If the defendent really is putting this guy out of business with lies, this is one of those cases.
        • Didn't the poster say he was going to lose his business.

          Oh, please. He said it was AIMED at his business. I've seen where folks would not go to a linked story to read the article, but this takes the cake.

          Really, the whole article is pretty weak - "Someone said something bad about someone's business - should they sue?" We really don't know what was said, in what forum, or who could have seen it. The only answer that makes any sense here is "maybe."

          Really, though, someone on the 'net said something bad? Maybe even a flame? Quick, call the 10 o'clock news! An online retort is probably the only response that makes sense, with the possible exception of ignoring the whole thing.

      • Re:How about maturing instead. :-) (Score:4, Interesting)

        by bwt ( 68845 ) on Tuesday November 19, 2002 @03:00PM (#4708786)
        He can GROW UP and handle some immature bozo who bothers him in online forums like a man.

        I think this is a bit overly harsh, but I do agree that litigation should be a last resort. A much better plan is to agressively RESPOND. The best counterattack to inaccurate speech is accurate speech. Trust your audience. Most people recognize a creep when he's called on it.

        Make a website and post the correct responses to all of the inaccuracies and lies that the anonymous coward is spreading. Do it in the form of an FAQ. Restate his assertions in question form, answer them. Ask your own question, answer them. The go to EVERY forum where the lies have been posted and post the link with a brief statement and put him on the defensive.

        Be sure to pose questions back to the originator:

        Q: Why does John Doe post anonymously?
        A: He knows what he is saying is false and he doesn't want to associate his name with his pretended beliefs.

        Q: Why does he post my private information?
        A: He doesn't want a battle of ideas, but rather a battle of cheap shots.

        Q: Why does he keep repeating lie X, when the truth is Y?
        A: Because he doesn't care about the truth, but instead wants the negative effect of deceitful propaganda.

        Q: Who is John Doe? What is his agenda?
        A: He may be a crackpot. He may work for one of my competitors. He may be an ex-girlfriend. He may be mentaly ill. We don't know because he posts anonymously. We don't really know anything about him other than he likes to spew anonymous attacks. He clearly has an agenda to try to damage my business through lies and deceipt.

        Q: How credible is John Doe?
        A: He spews anonymous attacks and won't respond to the truth. I put my name on my work and my communications. You be the judge who is more credible.

        You get the idea.
      • The friend should take it "like a man" and be more like you, eh? Be a shame if she's a woman -- or in your vernacular "a whiny little pussy"?

        Setting aside the difficulty of taking it like a man if your livelihood rather than ego is being destroyed, I'd like to point out that journalists can be a little biased on the topic of defamation. Think about -- virtually all of them risk defamation lawsuits all the time, whether malicious or justified. Journalists celebrate First Amendment protection, and journalistic institutions have litigated their freedom to publish to the highest levels of the judiciary.

        There's more than a little risk they might pooh-pooh the woes of a defamed individual and decry litigation. At least John Wayne here surely does.

        If you have a good cause, sue their shorts off.
    • IAAL, but no expert on this stuff. I can however agree that libel is a "disfavored action" which kinda means it pisses courts off and is difficult to win. Often a libel action results from a childish squabble, and sometimes it implicates free speech interests.

      However, what the poster describes is much more worrisome because of the implied threat to his business and his privacy. This implicates additional torts such as interference with business relations, invasion of privacy, any monetary damages resulting from same, etc. which are much more readily actionable. If an action is begun, the plaintiff will have access to discovery, subpoena, etc. (Some of these claims may have criminal analogs, which may not get the DA excited but may help the harasser to sober up.) The ISP might oppose a subpoena, but probably won't.

      In any event, anticipate spending thousands on litiagtion, or representing yourself and spending hundreds of hours on it.

      It's an uphill battle, and probably not worth undertaking because of the costs and your ulcers. It would be important to objectively assess what threat this person poses, as opposed to how personally upsetting their actions are. It sucks, but one hopes your customers or business partners are smarter than to rely on something they heard from some anonymous person on a newsgroup.

      My sympathies, I'm sure it hurts. But you may do well enough posting calm denials, or ignoring the person altogether. You might also -enjoy- a little informal detective work to determine who the person is (lure them into the open), but don't retaliate in kind or piss the person off even more.
    • There is another trick the victim can use that I've used successfully. People like bad news. So give them some. Add to the "slander", but add to it in such a way that's its total unbelievable, i.e. he embezzled money from the company, add so he can support his 36 adopted children and buy a ride on the space shuttle.
    • The key phrase there is "on subpoena". He's still gonna have to get a lawyer.

  • Ignore it. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stienman ( 51024 ) <adavis&ubasics,com> on Tuesday November 19, 2002 @02:40AM (#4704158) Homepage Journal
    Online forum? He can post well reasoned, sane replies to the same forum. Anyone who goes to the trouble of reading the forum will run across them and be able to make up their own mind.

    Unless your friend has the money and desire to pursue this legally, outside of the internet, then the only way to fight 'public' slander, libel, abuse, etc, is to present yourself in that 'public' forum, and let the readers know who you really are.

    But, quite frankly, it sounds like this is a small time deal, and I bet the only thing impacted will be your friend's pride.

    Of course, you're asking slashdot. I mean, really, all we can do is stroke your ego by saying insipid things like, "Dude, you are so right to toast him!"

    As with all things in life, this too shall pass.

    -Adam
    • yeah, I totally agree with this guy. Just post a rebuttal in the forum. At the worst the "perpetrator" will continue to harass you, and that just makes it easier to identify them.

      Also, seriously, how damaging are posts in a forum on the internet? I mean there are entire websites devoted to hating certain companies. Anti-Microsoft websites are a prime example. I don't see any real damage they have done, if any. Being obviously a smaller business with only 1 small forum having 1 small post in it I don't think it's actually going to hurt your friend. And if there are no real damages there is no way you can sue, and no reason to either.

      We could probably help you more if you weren't keeping your friend anonymous, but that same anonymity which protects your friend is the same that prevents you from knowing the "culprit".

      Sticks and stones... Sticks and stones...
    • Your sig doesn't add up... You probably mean performance to price ratio...

  • the answer (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GoatPigSheep ( 525460 ) on Tuesday November 19, 2002 @02:40AM (#4704162) Homepage Journal
    demand the posts be taken down from the site where they were posted. It is illegal for a site to refuse to remove personal information which was posted without permission. There are no legal loopholes around this.

    Some sites, such as slashdot, refuse to take down any posts, but a simple legal letter from a lawyer will quickly change anyones mind.

    good luck!

    • Re:the answer (Score:2, Interesting)

      by ichimunki ( 194887 )
      Um, a simple legal letter from a lawyer isn't worth the paper it's written on, unless the receiving party is easily scared by lawyers. And Slashdot has taken down posts when they have been deemed to put Slashdot at rish-- witness the hoo-ha over a Crutch of Scientology document posted by an AC.

      And there is a huge legal loophole that allows for posting fairly "private" information on the net without someone's permission. It's called the First Amendment to the Constitution-- and people (and governments) are using that to do things like harrass abortion providers and their clients, harrass prostitutes and exotic dancers and their clients, harrass unapproved pharmaceutical dealers and their clients, and, in the case, of government, find criminals (FBI most wanted list) or harrass convicted felons after their release from prison (via sex offender registries posted to the net).

      I'm curious... do you live in the U.S. and, if so, which laws are you talking about?
      • 1) After being legally informed that information is libel (more than a letter from a lawyer may be needed), the hosting servers are then at risk of also being sued (if they continue to provide the data)

        2) depending on the info posted, identity theft (or accessory to) is a possibility (someone would have to actually commit it to be prosecuted though)

        3) Just copyright your personnal information then anyone posting it without your permission is in violation of your copyright.
        a) copyright personnal info
        b) piss people off
        c) sue them when they post your info (Profit ;)
      • Your name, address, and phone number are not private information; they are publicly available to anyone who wants to know where you live.

        If someone posted, say, your bank account numbers, or other PRIVATE information that they should NOT know, you have a legitimate case.

        Hey, you could always use the DMCA in this case. who cares if the mateiral is copywritten or not.. they will have to take it down unless the person who posted it files proper documents indicating that the material is NOT a copyright violation, in his opinion, and is willing to defend it. In this case, the ISP can keep it up, pending a lawsuit.
        Of course, to file such documents, he would have to reveal his name.
  • I suspect that I am a reader of the forum you are talking about.

    The product in question is one that has wide respect in its industry (audio speakers). Several other manufacturers re-use the product within their own. The population of the forum is generally intelligent if forceful in their opinions.

    From what I've read there the slander has gone nowhere. Is the perp trying to up the ante at other sites?

    I think the non-revelation of IP etc. is the right course of action for the site admins even if it is painful. They might consider sending a private message to the perp if he/she/it can be identified.

  • Try to get an order out on the forum, which says that they cannot delete the logs in question until an actual decision can be made. This is probably easier and faster to get than the actual logs, and can possibly get you some extra time.
    Look up information on similar cases or laws. Police//FBI might not have any sympathy, but for new types of crime like this, it would be best to let all involved know about precedent and who is really responcible jurristiction-wise.
    Get a lawyer if you want, but I'm pretty sure you're fucked. That said, ignore everything I said above.

  • Need help? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Associate ( 317603 )
    Ten years ago a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the A-Team.
    The old A-team theme [xs4all.nl]

  • IANAL...but... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by IshanCaspian ( 625325 )
    First get these definitions out of the way: http://www.hfac.uh.edu/comm/media_libel/libel/defi nition.html If it's written, it's libel, if it's spoken it's slander. Because your friend has access to this message board, he has an opportunity to respond. You can be sued for saying "Joe Smith is a bed-wetter" on television if Joe Smith isn't there to defend himself. However, if Joe can defend himself, such as via your message board, he is a "Limited Public Figure." This means that you must demonstrate that there was actual malice, "the act of publishing or broadcasting statements with prior knowledge of the inaccuracy of the statement or a reckless disregard for the truth." Furthermore, it must be shown that the aim of this malice was to damage his reputation. If the party in question said "Your friend is an alcoholic and a pedophile.", knew that he was neither, and did so solely to harm his reputation, that's libel. If the party in question said "Your friend's product is designed so it will always break after a week.", knowing that was not the case for the sole purpose of harming his reputation, that's libel. However, if they said "Don't buy this guy's products, they are going to break." and they do so because you have a 50% return rate, then there's truth to what they are saying. Your post is so vague it's hard to tell, but here's the screnario I'm imagining... Your buddy sells whatever, he sold someone a broken one, they snagged a leaked memo talking about defective items or whatever, and he decided to to post it on a message board somewhere. Your friend got his panties all in a knot, and here we are. Why is my guess so skewed against the poster? Well, because the Libel laws are pretty damn clear; had there been a real case of Libel, the poster's buddy would be counting the cash right now, instead of bitching about what 40 year old geeks are saying about him from their mother's basements to ask slashdot. Either that, or I post on that message board, and am trying to keep you from filing suit. ;)
  • In the days of BBSing, people would post the phone number of someone they didn't like as a BBS number (if they were really vindictive, they'd post it world-wide). The target would ultimately have to change their phone number to avoid the calls. What happened to your friend is a more modern version. It happens, more often than we'd like, but it happens. There isn't much one can do about it - even the ./ moderation system isn't perfect.

    The forum logs may not give you evidence of who the perpetrator was. You can challenge the forum host/moderator to step forward, remove the offending posts, and ban the poster, but there are no guarantees. Business is like that. Maybe it's not Michael Moore who's after your friend, and maybe it's not justified, but if you're in business, somewhere, sometime, someone is going to vent their frustrations at you.

    Have your friend post a cogent, civil response. Ask the forum moderators to be more proactive if you're so inclined. Then get on with business.

    If your friend's business is doing well enough to afford an attorney to look into this, be thankful, but there are better things to spend that money on. If he/she can't afford an attorney, there are more important things for your friend to be spending his/her time on.
  • This story smells extremely fishy. I don't think we know all that's going on here. Something doesn't add up. It seems heavily slanted in favor of only one side of this dispute. Do we have any proof that this is even true? It could be misrepresentation, exaggeration, or out-and-out lying. I wish we knew what the other side of the story was.

    I'd like to say this to the person facing these problems:

    What aren't you telling us? People are harassing you like this for no reason whatsoever? I don't believe it. What did you do to bring this upon yourself? Did you harass them first? Did you harass friends of theirs? Did you attack their websites, mail-bomb them, or make threats against them and their families? People don't launch into campaigns of harassment unprovoked. What aren't you telling us? I'd really like to know.

    For all we know, you could've been engaging for years in behavior many times worse than what's currently being done to you, and somebody finally decided to stand up to you. "Vigilante justice" indeed.

    I'm not saying that whatever you've done in the past justifies what's being done to you now, but maybe you should examine your own life before you start casting stones at others.

    • Re:I don't think we're getting the full story. (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      See, this is exactly why false accusations work. They always instill this kind of doubt which the accused can never shake off, not through denial, not through a verdict in court, not at all.

      People do go on crusades like this for seemingly miniscule reasons. They may have an issue with their opponent, but some people just blow it completely out of proportion. Unless you have some insight into what created the disagreement, you should not assume that the defendant has caused the situation. It is reasonable to treat the cases separately and only connect them when it's time to assess the penalty to both parties. The poster did not mention names and has not given hints which could lead to the "crime scene". Therefore this "ask slashdot" is probably not in itself a retaliatory act.

      • See, this is exactly why false accusations work. They always instill this kind of doubt which the accused can never shake off, not through denial, not through a verdict in court, not at all.
        People do go on crusades like this for seemingly miniscule reasons. They may have an issue with their opponent, but some people just blow it completely out of proportion. Unless you have some insight into what created the disagreement, you should not assume that the defendant has caused the situation.

        By the same token, you should not assume the defendant is innocent. This person is taking the right position, although a bit too far. He doesn't trust the person being attacked anymore than he trusts the attacker. We don't know the specifics of the situation, so either side could be right/wrong, lying/telling the truth. It's not right to assume the attacks are true, but it's also not right to assume the attacks are false.
    • It could be the spammer woman some news talked about lately for example.
    • this your first time on the internet?

      people will fight tooth and nail over the stupidest most asinine things in existance around here. If you made a more solid argument about using one shaving cream over another, BAM you're a target for slander. Woops, there's your email address - oh, there's your resume - you work for foo - hmm, let's go slander foo in a business related forum or other such place.

      Oh look - 15 minutes of the attackers time later, he feels better and you've just had a horridly untrue sob story posted which if you defend could only make it worse.
    • Fishy indeed :) It does indeed sounds similar to the case of the shady internet trader suing its ex-customers for complaining online that the aquatic plants supplied arriving dead or dying.

      Indeed the original is so dramatically exaggerated, I was sceptical after the first line, it reeks of somebody taking a personal affront, at first I considered it troll bait and I'm surprised any /.ers accepted it at face value.

    • Silly (Score:2)

      by waldoj ( 8229 )
      This story smells extremely fishy. I don't think we know all that's going on here. Something doesn't add up.

      If you've never been the victim of something like this, you're either a total newbie or a liar. The fact is that, when people achieve a certain level of prominence in the world, they're going to have a troll. I had my very own troll [slashdot.org] earlier this year when I was running for office. I'd bet cash money that this guy couldn't pick me out of a crowd of two, and posted 25 fraudulent, slanderous messages just because it was amusing. Hell, I might do the same thing if you caught me in the right mood. I suppose you could postulate that surely I must have done something to cause somebody to be a dick to me, but you'd be wrong.

      The fact is that shit happens, whether or not you think that life works like that. Rather than buying into his troll's problems, perhaps you could offer some tips as to what he should be doing to fix this problem.

      -Waldo Jaquith
  • An AC posted a link to this site ( http://www.guppylog.com/ ) , but was modded down...on closer examination, look what I found! Okay, I'm weighing in on this. By Scott Lockwood from the What kind of crap is that??? department, Section News Posted on Wed Oct 23rd, 2002 at 03:25:29 PM CDT6CST You will now notice a link at the top of the page in support of the legal defense fund against the SLAPP suits one Robert Novak has filed against people who report having had bad service from his store. Folks, all other arguments aside, as a veteran I find there is nothing more important than our freedom of speech. People like Novak who try to hide alleged shoddy service with $15,000,000.00 lawsuits (yes, that's the right number of zeros!) should go to jail in my opinion. (1 comment) Comments >> Find the related lawsuit: http://petsforum.com/psw/Default.html The story fits with the poster. Libel on an internet message board. I think that's the other side to our story. In which case the poster is probably a wanker.
    • This is close, but as far as I know, this story isn't about me. My particular band of criminals have no connection to Robert Novak for one, and have done more real life harrassment like calling my home at 2am and that of my wife's mother at similar hours. The use a cloned cell phone to try and remain untraceable. I wish who ever this is happening to better luck dealing with getting the problem taken care of than I have had thus far, though I am finally getting some cooperation out of the authorities now.
  • we suspect certain people of perpetrating this series of crimes

    one word: sub7 [donkboy.com]
  • Rape and pillage. That is what I do.
  • The internet being the dangerous place that it is (to those not seasoned to it), I've seen it happen many times. As such, I've seen it happen to me.

    It has happened twice now that my personal info has been posted in a chat room or forum, that info gathered from either my name or simply what I've told about myself. Both times it has come to a personal threat, one way or another.

    Simply put, use your personal information with caution. I still use my info without much worry just because I don't have much to lose, being a minor. Sometimes this can be quite difficult, however.

    In these occasions, be prepared to get your hands dirty. I recall one instance where my IP was posted in a hackers chat room simply because I went in there to find out about any new exploits (I was doing a study). In instances like this the law is not going to interfere nor punish those who've commited cybercrimes simply because damage cannot be proven. Even legitimate business and users cannot prove damage without noteable expense.

    Defend yourself accordingly, knowing the fact that the law cannot punish you for doing so if they are not first willing to punish the people who perpetrated the crime in the first place.
    • The internet being the dangerous place that it is

      GW? Is that you, calling out to us from the "dark dungeons of the internet" [brainyquote.com]? The internet is not dangerous, unless you count electrocution or eye-strain. The internet is a computer network (actually a network of networks, but who's counting). Your IP (assuming you mean address and not the nebulous "intellectshul propetty") is not private info. It's absolutely essential to the functioning of the network... yes, the bad guys took note that you were poking around... because they figured you were either an easy mark or someone to keep an eye on. Yes, be careful what you do, because you don't want to attract the wrong kind of attention to yourself. That could get you in trouble, both online and off.

      As to people being punished for cybercrimes, take a look at someone like Randal Schwartz or Keven Mitnick or Jan Johansen or Dmitry Sklyarov and tell me that people aren't being punished... some of the people I've mentioned probably didn't even commit any real crimes, and the list of people arrested, tried, and convicted for various computer-related crimes is pretty long.

  • Hire a Lawyer (Score:5, Informative)

    by automandc ( 196618 ) on Tuesday November 19, 2002 @03:43AM (#4704333)
    As a lawyer currently working on online libel issues, I can offer a little bit of insight, but don't take this as actual legal advice!

    (1) Forums/websites etc. are not nearly as immune from discovery (the formal process of discovering information) as they like to pretend. For instance, a recent decision by the Virginia Supreme Court [state.va.us] held that AOL is not immune from a subpoena issued by a California court in a libel case.

    (2) In order to get discovery from the forum, you will need to initiate a lawsuit. There are two ways you can go. If you have a reasonable idea of who the perpetrator is, you can sue them on theory alone. If you have no idea of the actual identity, you can bring a "John Doe" suit, and then seek third-party discovery to uncover the identity of the defendant.

    (3) You need a lawyer to do any of this. Depending on where you are, the severity of the attack, the potential damages, and the ability to easily reach the suspected perpetrator, you may be able to find an attorney to handle this on a contingency basis. Unfortunately, because libel cases are notoriously hard to win, and don't usually pay a lot in damages, this may be very difficult.

    (4) if you have business insurance you should check if it covers this type of claim.

    A closing point: I have said before [slashdot.org] that the popularity of the internet didn't alter the fundamentals of libel and slander. It is cases like these (taking the poster at face value) that demonstrate what I mean. Just because the actionable speech is in an online forum instead of in a newspaper, or on the radio doesn't mean that it is fundamentally different than those media. On the flip side, there are significant protections built into the U.S. libel law, and those protections generally discourage all but the most serious and meritorious suits.

    Good luck with you problem. It would be interesting to hear greater detail (what forum? what type of business? etc.).

    automandc

  • if someone flames you online you should consider the response carefully and take your time. Get a beer and think up some good things to say.

    Like about their Mother.

    Babbling fools are everywhere. Online don't take them seriously. Show you have more class and drop them into your kill file (ignore list, not the other one like Nixon and Bush keep)

    Like other little children they get bored and leave. Mock them if they use AOL as that's likely.

  • Reflect (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Koos Baster ( 625091 ) <ghostbustersNO@SPAMxs4all.nl> on Tuesday November 19, 2002 @07:17AM (#4704849)
    What Should You Do When Attacked Online?

    1) Wonder WHY someone would attack you. Is it plain vandalism, or are you in some kind of business which make people angry (politics, weaponery, multinational), or you may live in a country that makes people angry (iraq, usa, israel, taiwan,...)

    2) Talk to you opponents, or if you can't reach them, someone representative for their opinion. Convince them with sound arguments that they're doing the wrong thing, listen to their explanation of why they think you're doing the wrong thing. Ie. Communicate. This crucial stage solves 90% of the problems people tend to have.

    3) Adopt to your new understanding of the situation, and see what happens. Stay calm, be patient. Remember that your life isn't on the line (yet).

    4) If none of the above work leave some common sense out: switch to diplomacy, laws, threats, or technological defenses. (Note however, that more agressive tactics don't necessarily tackle the remaining 10% of the problems, but rather 10% of 10%.)

    5) Wait for a totalitarian system of corporate control to take care of all of our daily lives, as well as those of our attackers.

    --

    Just my $0.02 as a hippie

  • WiredPatrol (Score:3, Informative)

    by rakerman ( 409507 ) on Tuesday November 19, 2002 @07:59AM (#4705022) Homepage Journal
    Maybe see if Wired Patrol [wiredpatrol.org] can help?
  • I am here to exert a little justice!

    No, just kidding. Not to make light of what I'm sure you feel is a very important problem, but dont you think you *could* be overreacting?
    Take a look through the slashdot discussion archives. Theres plenty of slanderous stuff there!

    And by the way, your mother was a hampster and your father smelled of elderberries!!
  • What the attacker is going is illegal, and the police investigators should do ther job.

    The fact that they don't have enough technical expertise is not an excuse, they should hire someone technically savvy to help the investigators prepare their warrants and analyse their logs. But often they say that a simple threat is not enough to justify hiring a technician. In that case, you should tell them to consider this as a threat by (snail) mail, they don't need any technical knowledge to investigate this.

    What you friend should do, at the very least, is to print a copy of the arrassing texts and handle them to the police investigators. You can also tell them who you suspect is doing this. More often than others the investigators will meet with the suspect attacker and they'll often be able to make him stop just by showing that their involved and that they will take the investigation further if the threats don't stop.

    You'd be surprised to see how much social engeneering is important in these kind of things, much more than technical knowledge. The investigators are pretty much experts in social engeneering, so they shouldn't be affraid to take this case because it's on the web.

    So tell your friend to print the texts and handle them to the police, if they refuse to take the case, ask to speak with the police chief.

    GFK's
  • This is one of those situations where the 'victim' must act or just accept the consequences. If law enforcement won't respond (and they won't), then the solution is to hire an attorney to prepare and file a lawsuit against "John Doe" and then issue a subpoena for the server logs and other records. Yes, it will cost thousands of dollars. Yes, it is entirely possible that the person responsible is judgment-proof (has no assets to pay any damages). However, if the private lawsuit turns up clearer records of harassment and illegal conduct, then in some situations you might be able to turn them over to law enforcement and persuade them to act.

    Life sucks. People do bad things. Your neighbor's kid cranks up the stereo to 180db every night at midnight, waking your kids out of a sound sleep. The same a**hole drives around traffic jams on the shoulder on the freeway every day. Your ex tells everyone lies about you. People send you spam. Telemarketers call you during dinner, even after you ask to be on their "do not call" lists.

    At some point, you must choose whether to accept these offenses, or take lawful action in response. It may not be economically viable, especially if the offender's actions have cut off your income. But if you don't take appropriate action to rectify the situation, nothing will be done and the situation will continue.

    If you don't like the situation, call your state legislator or congressman and try to propose a better solution than the private court system. Be prepared to explain where the money will come from.

  • Who'd have thought that the petswarehouse.com guy would have the balls to have a friend ask slashdot about how to sue slashdot?

  • If you wish to convince /.er of the merit of your [friends] 'case' and solicit aid perhaps you should include more hard facts and less superlative.

    The chances are you'll obtain little aid here unless you can produce hard evidence. This also coincides with the best way for anybody to rebutt an alleged 'slander, libel' which is hard facts!

    As for posting 'private information' this must have either been made available already or be a matter of public record, either way it is not private.

    Your suggestion that the only way you can 'prove a crime' is throught the revalation of the persons identity is clearly absurd and make me even more suspicious of your motives. If your evidence cannot stand without knowledge of the identity of the poster it must be pretty weak. Therefore your attempts to obtain the logs appear to be a fishing expedition. I applaud the site's resistance.

    Your apparently unwillingness to deal with the sites lawyers, the fact the Police & FBI have declined to act on your complaint further vindicate the view that your claims are disingenuous. Also since slander and libel are civil not criminal issues and the whole scenario suggests miss-handling an aggrieved customer and not of being innocent victim of a groundless 'attack'.

  • Is your friend being attacked because he/she is a sleazeball spammer? Be honest!

    If that's the reason for the attacks, well, what can I tell you, your friend deserves everything he/she has coming to him/her. Come to think of it, probably deserves even worse.

    You might as well ask "My friend keeps jumping in water and is still getting wet, what should he do?"
  • If you friend has made so many enemies that people want to put him out of business, maybe his business is a public disservice, and should be shut down. Without knowing what company your question refers to, I can't say any more, but I will point out that it's not libel if it's true, no matter how negative, and it's not libel if it's only opinion, no matter how negative.
    • Actually it could be considered slander if it is not true. An example would be, if someone is spreading rumors that they use live animal testing and they don't, then this could be considered slander. Slandar is punishable under the law. There is a difference between me saying I don't like slashdot or I don't like intel or something stupid like that. This would be my opinion. However if I said something about slashdot that could cause them to loose business or that could potentially cause them to loose business and was NOT true then I could be held liable.

      To me this is to vague. If someone said the guy is a jerk or something then it is an opinion and there is nothing he can do. It would really have to be an untruth said about the business.

      And no my signature does not count cause it is an silly statement that does not cause them or me any harm.

  • Perhaps you should print or otherwise capture the postings - even the entire thread - so that you have some kind of evidence should you need or want to present it in the future. I am not sure you are likely to get any 'source addresses', etc. from the provider of the forums. The next thing you do is work hard to counteract said negative image; hopefully without starting a flame war that makes you come across as even more negative.

    Seriously, guys and girls, the sheer cynicism and negative reaction in all these posts appall me. I can't believe how harsh you can be to one of your own. I've never seen someone who is the victim of flaming get bashed so horribly.
  • "The best cure for bad speech is more speech."
    (I'm sorry I don't know who said that first)

    If someone libels you in a *public* online forum, then they've given you the opportunity to explain your position, refute their facts, point out their cowardice in posting anonymously, and otherwise come out on top.

    Sometimes, also, it's important to remember that while sticking to our natural, fundamental rights, things don't always work out "fairly" as a child might define it. In the larger view, allowing free and open anonymous public commentary without fear of legal action or reprisal is an amazing benefit which tends to improve life. Unfortunately, while the benefits accrue to everyone, the negative aspects hit a few specific people. Someone who loses their business due to libel is not treated "fairly" and the instinctive reaction is to find a legal remedy. Unless the legal remedy can be carved out narrowly enough to address the wrong without lessening the free-speech benefit to all, it's not worth it. It might well be worth it to the guy who lost his business, but businesses can be rebuilt, lost rights are harder to fix. It's unfair, and people of good conscience should work to find ways outside the legal system to respond to these unfair episodes (for instance through moderation ala Slashdot).

    Forget the lawyers, sit down at your keyboard and compose thoughtful responses to the nasty posts.

    ~~~~~~~
  • If you have a real slander or libel case (I forget which is which, I'm not a lawyer, yadda yadda)... get a lawyer. If they are outright lies, stated as fact, you probably have a case. If they are OPINIONS, you don't. If you think you can clearly show that this person is deliberately lying in order to tarnish your company, sue his ass.

    consider if it's worth your time. A counterinformation campaign might be better.
  • First the "forum" doens't have common-carrier status; that is a specific legal status that is granted to PHONE COMPANIES that makes them not responsible for the content of the calls going over their wires; it's not something you can just say "I don't monitor stuff so I have common carrier protection".

    The forum may have a policy of not revealing information, but a court can *easily* make them do so.

    Secondly, posting names and phone numbers and addresses in public is not illegal; if that is what you mean by "posting personal information", you don't have a case. Posting bank account numbers, and other PRIVATE information is more serious, but posting a phone number or address, that's generally considered public information.

  • Many states have enacted anti-stalking laws. I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure the behavior has to be threatening to be considered stalking. If he's just talking shit then it's probably not stalking, but if he is threatening you then it might be.

    Also, you can always sue someone for anything. It's just a matter of WINNING the lawsuit.

    Maybe you could look into a restraining order as well.

Slashdot Top Deals

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Close