“Involuntary porn” site tests the boundaries of legal extortion

Re:“Involuntary porn” site tests the boundaries of legal ext... by debacle on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @10:33AM (#4778469)

I don't know the particulars of fraud as it relates to the website - I haven't read anything but the OP - but the extortion claim is difficult because the images themselves have value to the website. It really depends on the representation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“Involuntary porn” site tests the boundaries of legal ext... by tptacek on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @10:36AM (#4778489)

That sounds like a really good point. Wire fraud is what Ken White said, after he and Randazza came to the conclusion that "David Blade", the "independent takedown lawyer", was just a screen name for the operators of the site.

(Randazza had a back-and-forth with "David Blade", who was as it turns out almost certainly not a lawyer, which is something a real lawyer can pretty quickly tell with a couple of questions, like, "why aren't you registered in the state you claim to practice in" and others).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“Involuntary porn” site tests the boundaries of legal ext... by danielweber on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @12:09PM (#4779061)

I've been following this case for a while (Ken's blog is great) and suggested extortion a few times, but they seem keen on pursuing the wire fraud angle.

Probably because it's so open and shut. If the people running the site have gotten someone to send them money, it's essentially game over.

[ Parent | on HN ]