Sue Scheff: Tormented by Cyberstalker, Ropes Partner Drafts New Legislation on Online Libel

I recently read a very interesting article on updating the CDA 1996 (Communications Decency Act) finally.

Until you become a target/victim of someones vengeance through a keypad, it is hard to describe how powerless the normal person feels. Attorney Joan Lukey is not stranger to litigation, however when she become a target of an unhappy defendant, she realizes just how legislation has not caught up with today's needs.

Read this article here: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202430012681

This re-iterates that my new book coming out this fall, Google Bomb, could not have better timing! When Revenge becomes E-Venge..... learn how to protect yourself both legally and in cyberspace.

Dozier Internet Law: Defamation of The Dead on NPR Monday

Dozier Internet Law's John W Dozier Jr. will be on National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" Monday. Tune in to learn about defamation of the dead...and how to deal with social network profiles of the deceased...interesting and timely topics. No doubt that the complexities of living life in a connected world are growing.

Dozier Internet Law: Wikipedia's Death Is Greatly Exaggerated

I am always fascinated by what one of the leading Internet Lawyer, John Dozier, Blogs about. I have to share it on my Blog - hoping that more and more people will see that there will be positive changes eventually online - the wild, wild web is growing. What is fact and what is fiction? It can be hard to determine with a click of a mouse!

Source: Dozier Internet Law

Eric Goldman blogged yesterday on "why Wikipedia will fail". This the same day Wikipedia's plans to start policing its content more aggressively was widely publicized in the wake of some quack editing biographies to reflect the death of prominent politicians. The reports of their deaths were greatly exaggerated...borrowing for a moment from Mark Twain. The Dozier Internet Law blog entry on Wikipedia and Section 230 yesterday pointed out the admirable intent and the inherent risks involved. It's a good example of why the immunity provisions of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act need to be changed.

So the response from the other side, through Eric Goldman, a law professor and one of the group of online legal warriors intent on trying to protect netizens so they can say whatever they want, when they want, where they want, seemingly without regard to how uncivil, inappropriate, defamatory and damaging the comments might be, is unfortunately not unexpected. This type of attack journalism comes with the support of a small ring of lawyers online who try to protect free speech by constantly attacking the speech of those who disagree. The irony does not escape us at Dozier Internet Law .

Wikipedia wants to edit. A more civil environment is a noble cause, to be sure. Instead of debating the issue of Section 230's application and how it prevents self policing and self regulation by those legitimately concerned about creating a more civil online society, attack journalism 101 begins.

These free speech expansionists, under the guise of "legal scholars", know that as major players in the online world begin to realize the wayward nature of online scofflaws and the need to do something about it, like amend Section 230 to empower self governance, the dialogue moves to a place they don't want to be. Sanity will eventually be restored once this path is pursued, and their constituencies will lose. In the name of free speech, they say, if you disagree with our position, we will not respond.

Except to attack the speaker...put into question the viability of a business that dares to offend their notions of how the web should be governed. Come on, can't you come up with something a bit more original? Free speechers are all for free speech, until they don't agree with it. Then they abandon the notion of a engaging robustly in the "marketplace of ideas", and go on the attack.

Dozier Internet Law: The Sky is Falling?

As usual, John Dozier, leading Internet Attorney - writes very interesting articles and Blogs. Yes, things are changing in Cyberspace -more and more people will be held accountable for their keystrokes - whether they are text messages, or IM's - get ready - a change is coming.

Source: Dozier Internet Law - by John Dozier

I keep seeing briefs from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Public Citizen, and a lot of apparently ill-informed "professors" imploring the Judges to, in effect, agree with them in cases or the Internet will collapse. At Dozier Internet Law we even have a name for them..."chicken little briefs". So before the sky falls, let me point out that these free speechers and civil libertarian types keep submitting briefs advising of our imminent demise if they do not win. Has anyone mentioned to them that they keep losing, but the Internet is still here?

The sky is really falling? Now this mantra has been carried out into the non-lawyer public arena and people are actually repeating this jibberish. The MySpace Suicide conviction is a good case on point. The argument is that if you allow a website to dictate the terms of use of its site, and criminalize the unauthorized "outside of terms" uses, it will cause everyone to stop using the web because of fear of criminal prosecution. This power to establish terms is without precedent, the argument goes.

Therefore, the Courts should take the law passed by Congress and signed by the President and change it. Considering the roles our branches of government play this is a philosophically corrupt argument. It also makes no sense whatsover. Without precedent??? Are you kidding me? Okay, I can accept the fact that EFF, ACLU and Public Citizen have an agenda and bias and prejudice is expected. But these "law professors" should know better. Here's why:

If you break your rental car agreement and don't return it, you have violated the rental car company's "terms of use". Who reads those things? And it is grand larceny.

If you buy a software program, copy it and begin selling copies contrary to the license terms (which no one reads), then it is criminal copyright infringement.

Those are just two of what could be a long, long list. Because "unauthorized use" is a basic element that is often used to show the "mens rea" (latin for "guilty mind") in order to convict someone. So, the MySpace suicide conviction is nothing more than a continuation of the law. This is pretty elementary and is usually covered in the first year of law school. But then it hit me..."law professors" with enough time on their hands to interject themselves into pending cases all around the country probably aren't teaching first year law school classes.

People are still renting cars the last time I checked. Apparently software programs are still being used too! Is everyone worried that if they violate the "terms of use" (contracts or licenses) they'll end up in prison? No. Because decent, law-abiding people know that if they don't act in a reckless, outrageous, grossly irresponsible way they will be safe. And that belief works just fine.

Well, the verdict is in and the defendant has been convicted. I don't see any panic online. Websites are still processing Christmas orders. Dozier Internet Law clients don't seem besides themselves with fear.

I did notice, though, that Friday night the moon was really bright and large. And I thought, just maybe, the sky was falling! I can picture 1,000 years ago..."chicken little" characters running through a town creating widespread panic with doomsday declarations and imploring the masses to run for the hills..."imminent catastrophic demise is upon us-the sky is falling!", they would cry.

Sounds familiar.

Fortunately there is a very logical, rational explanation...I saw online that it was the lunar perigee. Happens every 15 or 20 years. And I then imagined a learned astronomer going into the panicked streets of long ago and telling everyone that there is no emergency, "doomsday is not upon us, so take off your boots and forget about climbing those hills, the sky is not falling, there is no catastrophe, and you can all safely return to your homes."

He turns, wipes the sweat off his brow, gives me a wink, shakes his head in disapproval of the situation, and as he is greeted by his colleague I hear him whisper..."it's just those damn professors again".

Exactly.

Dozier Internet Law: New Laws are Coming

Want to know more about the Internet and the Legal Boundaries? Leading Internet Specialist Attorney, John Dozier Jr. is one of the best in the country and represents some of the top businesses in the world.

Keep in touch with the Legal World of the Internet at John's Blog at http://johndozierjr.typepad.com/dozierinternetlaw/

John W. Dozier, Jr. began practicing law in 1981 and has the highest rating (AV) by Martindale-Hubbell (meaning he has reached the "height of professional excellence and is recognized for the highest levels of skill and integrity"). Mr. Dozier is a "Legal Elite for 2008" as an Intellectual Property Lawyer through a peer selection process of the Virginia Bar Association and Virginia Business Magazine, was recognized through peer review as a "Super Lawyer" in Internet Law in the "Superlawyers" Magazine, was named as one of the top attorneys nationwide for 2008 in Intellectual Property Litigation in the Law and Politics Corporate Counsel Edition, and is peer selected as preeminent in the 2008 "Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers".

Dozier Internet Law: New Laws Are Coming from Dec. 11th, 2008

Have we now reached the point in which the web is so out of control that governmental authorities in the form of prosecutors and state Attorney General offices feel compelled to act? A federal prosecutor in LA gets a conviction of a mom for violating the terms of use of Myspace. The New Jersey AG sues JuicyCampus.com for consumer protection violations based upon misrepresentations in its terms of use. A Colorado prosecutor brings criminal charges against a poster for allegedly defamatory comments on Craigslist. What's going on here?

At Dozier Internet Law we have for a long while encouraged the self regulation and self policing of the web. History has told us that if that fails, government will get involved in one way or another. What we are seeing today is action by the executive and judicial branches of state government. Absent self policing, Congress, state legislators and even city and county governments will begin passing laws that will profoundly impact the web as we know it.

Codes of ethics for search engine optimization and affiliate marketers have been around for a while. So that industry is trying, at least. But what can web developers, web hosts, ISPs, and domain registrars do to send the message to the legislators that positive steps are being taken to provide a more safe, secure and civil Internet? Each can consider establishing strict guidelines and implementing them through their User Agreements and Acceptable Use Policies. Then, they can each aggressively enforce those rules. And there is no law prohibiting a business from deciding with whom it will do business absent discrimination being visited upon a protected class. And why not do so? In a time when Dozier Internet Law is defending lawsuits filed against webhosts, ISPs, software developers, and ESPs for the conduct of their customers, why would a legitimate business not police itself? There is no reason.

Recently we have seen high profile calls by Public Citizen for web hosts to be willing to bring their financial resources to the table to defend the misconduct of their customers. We, and other lawyers in the know, call this type of a host "bullet proof hosting" or "black hat hosting". The reputation of these hosts, to say the least, is anything but stellar. No legitimate host would want those labels. And there is no business reason to do so. Is this the type of protection a web host would freely offer up to a $7 a month customer? Of course not.So, on the one hand we have a pressing need to self regulate and self police, and efforts being made within industries and specific businesses to do so. On the other hand, there is the move afoot by the free speech and anti-business property rights groups to do everything they can to encourage misconduct. If the Public Citizen advice is followed that would be an invitation for legislation, a solicitation for more governmental intervention by the executive and judicial branches, and a recipe for disaster.

Web hosts should not only develop, implement and enforce strict guidelines aimed at returning safety, security and sanity to the online world, but undertake an industry-wide effort to establish a Code of Ethics and performance standards and good practice certifications. "Bullet proof" and "black hat" hosts need not apply because, well, you are ruining it for everyone.

Some of these free speech expansionsist public interest groups might think that high profile litigation surrounding new laws would be a good thing for fund raising. I am sure it would be. Is their advice motivated by greed? Or just a fanatical, one sided perspective nurtured by their long standing support of the scofflaws?
Here's the lesson, perhaps.

Is the message for web hosts that if you freely associate with outlaws, you find yourself thinking like them? I don't know. But it could explain Public Citizen's position

Sue Scheff: Dozier Internet Law - Top Ten Blogger Personas: The Mobosphere Unveiled

John Dozier, one of the leading Internet Lawyers in the country, wrote a very compelling article describing how Internet Slander and Defamation can be started. Who are the people hiding behind their keypads? Actually getting a thrill from harming others.

Are you a victim of Online Harassment, Internet Gossip, Cyber Slander, Internet Defamation? Find out more about where your perpetrator's motivation is. As a victim of this malicious conduct, this article by John Dozier can really explain so much about how revenge has become e-venge!

Top Ten Blogger Personas: The Mobosphere Unveiled

Ever since Congress passed Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act giving immunity to interactive service providers for publishing the defamation of others, a wide range of characters has arisen and infiltrated the mainstream blogosphere. Instead of becoming a source for obtaining reliable information, the blogosphere, and user generated content, is at risk of becoming a less credible information source. Dozier Internet Law defamation lawyers are constantly battling these “black hat” forces and over the past several years we have acquired quite an insight into this underworld; an anonymous and covert society bent on terrorizing businesses. These are our internal thoughts on the matter, and not scientific analyses. We are not psychiatrists; just defamation lawyers and trial lawyers trained for almost fifty years to figure out the human nature of clients, witnesses, and juries.

All too often blog attacks are simply protection rackets and extortion schemes in disguise. We have been working on documenting the organizational structure and operational methodologies used by these racketeers. For now, let’s take a look at the entire panoply of characters we seem, as business defamation lawyers, to run into. For those businesses under attack, it is essential that you first identify the publisher’s persona and motivation before beginning to identify the proper strategies for addressing his often seemingly legitimate posts. We don’t go into details on how we work with clients to deal with each type of personality, but the tools vary considerably from being passive, to utilizing SEO services, to implementing reputation management initiatives, to pre-litigation and lawsuit actions.

Defamation Lawyers Pursue Bloggers

1. Pickpocket

This is the guy who used to wait on street corners for elderly ladies to pass. He enjoys attacking defenseless people and stealing covertly using deception. This type of blogger will steal your copyright protected content, have the search engines push your prospective clients to his site, and then run ads and otherwise direct the traffic to your competitors. He could be an affiliate marketer for a competitor getting a share of the revenue, or he could simply be running Google or Yahoo ads on his site. Pickpockets also take great pleasure in stealing your trademarks…surreptitiously using your mark in hidden tags, meta tags, hidden redirect pages, or through a myriad of search engine optimization techniques, all in the hopes of re-directing your prospects to a competitor and taking money from you.

2. Wacko

We usually identify a wacko situation quickly. There are distinctive characteristics of his communications. The wacko is usually a “follower”, someone looking to gain attention and recognition, but escalates what may have started as fair criticism into more and more outrageous claims. Most sophisticated business people immediately view the poster as a “nut case”, particularly when an excessive amount of time or energy disproportionate to the merits of the subject is expended. But it is not easy for the typical browser on the web to see the pattern, usually spread over multiple web properties.

3. Druggie

Or, maybe “liquid courage” would be more appropriate. This guy is exactly what comes to mind. During the day this blogger is a normal guy, but at night he returns to the sanctity of his home, gets drunk or high, and goes out on the web looking for “hook-ups” and blogging on his “hang-ups”. This guy is hard to detect as a fraudster, and sometimes won’t recall what he said online the next day while under the influence. He posts aggressive, false and arbitrary attacks on whatever issue of the day (or night) catches his fancy.

4. Alien

No, not from another world. But from overseas. In a far, far away place, without any treaty with the US, in a country without an effective legal system and no notion of business or personal property ownership rights. Many of these types operate out of certain Russian provinces, but the blogs, postings and communications appear to be from the customer down the street. This individual usually has an ulterior motive, often working with the criminal discussed below. He has no fear, until he takes a vacation to Turkey and US federal agents grab him for extradition, which is exactly what happened on a case in the not so recent past.

5. Nerd

This is the guy who is scared to talk with a girl, but behind the keyboard, all alone, morphs into a Casanova. This empowerment of anonymity creates an omnipotent persona, and for the first time the nerd feels the effect of power and control, gets an adrenaline buzz when he exercises it, and he exercises it often, usually creating or perpetuating a volatile situation in which he feels he can outsmart the “opposition”. There is no principle involved. His blog postings are all about the adrenaline. It is hard to know if you are dealing with this type online…his posts are intelligent and on their face credible. But, once you identify the nerd blogger, he cowers and goes away, usually forever.

6. Rookie

Enjoy debating a thirteen year old? They are out on the net acting like adults, posting statements and play-acting like a grown-up. The challenge, of course, is that most people reading the posts have no idea these are coming from a kid. The tip off can be the utter immaturity of the posts, but most often the kids can sound credible criticizing, for instance, a CPA’s method of calculating RIO on REIT holdings, because they can mimic earlier posts. There is no insidious motive here; just kids having fun as the hormones kick in. But the readers of the blog posting don’t know that.

7. Sadist

This person attacks others, causes pain, and revels in the results in ways not worthy of mention. He loves to create, direct, control, and unleash a firestorm of criticism about a company just to create pain and damage. This type of person may often by the prime instigator of the online attacks, and tightens the noose by escalating the attack rapidly, almost as if in an obsessive state. You will find a sadist going to many sites and blogging, and he usually lets you know it was him because he uses his real moniker. He has characteristics of a stalker, and he is most likely to be the one that starts recommending direct physical violence against the executives of a company. This person is not motivated by money, but by the pure enjoyment of pain being visited upon innocent parties.

8. Bankrupt

No, not morally bankrupt. Actually bankrupt…no money, no assets, no prospects for work, and nothing to lose. These bloggers post without fear of the consequences or any regard for the truth because you “can’t get blood out of a turnip”, you “can’t get water from a rock”, and all these other sayings handed down, we surmise, through his generations. This is usually not a smart guy, but his postings are damaging and inflammatory. Many will own and control blogs without any concern about the consequences of liabilities that might arise through the perpetuation and “enhancement” of posts, and sometimes will post to their own blog and act like it was from a third party.

9. Criminal

Career criminals, no less. Like the convicted felon running a sophisticated extortion scheme against a very prominent business. Or the owner of an open blog avoiding service of process with guard dogs protecting his compound. The thieves and crooks of the world are online today; and the criminals often have both an organization and a highly effective and surprisingly coordinated operational plan in place to target a business. Rumors of $500,000 a year payoffs seem to promote this problem, which emanates from more of a “mobosphere” than the blogosphere.

10. Mis-Leader

This person is in no manner a leader. This blogger has a hidden agenda, but he just makes it sound like he is a totally objective commentator. He can create an appearance of authority and the casual visitor to his blog does not question the legitimacy. This type of persona is hard to figure out. One of the most pervasive practices is to control a blog and allow negative posts against all except his generous advertisers. Another common technique involves omission; not disclosing conflicts of interest or the existence of a business or personal relationship because the readers of the blog would totally discount the commentator’s posts as unreliable and biased.

Dozier Internet Law Defamation Lawyers

In closing, most of the blogosphere is legitimate, offers honest opinions and comments that add value to an open dialogue, and is an excellent example of the exercise of constitutionally protected free speech. As business defamation lawyers, we seen another side. The “mobosphere”, on the other hand, operates outside of the spotlight and often uses reckless, irresponsible, false and defamatory statements for personal or professional gain, all too often focused on self gratification and pecuniary benefits. As businesses attempt to leverage user generated content (“UGC”) into a valuable tool in the Web 2.0 environment, the proliferation of the scofflaws interrupting the free flow of credible speech in the online world puts at risk the reputation and integrity of UGC and raises the very real risk that consumers will begin viewing web content with disdain and suspicion.

Dozier Internet Law defamation lawyers offer a free consultation to qualified businesses and professionals undergoing attacks from the scofflaws of the web.

Dozier Internet Law: Public Citizen Lawsuit Thrown Out of Court

A lawsuit filed by Ronald J. Riley through his lawyers at Public Citizen against Dozier Internet Law has been summarily tossed out of Federal Court in Richmond, Virginia today. Judge Henry E. Hudson, declining to even entertain oral arguments on the points, found that Riley and Public Citizen's assertions in the lawsuit don't belong in Federal Court and are nothing more than defenses to the lawsuit Dozier Internet Law had already filed in state court against Riley.

This major setback for the litigation team at Public Citizen, and Paul Levy in particular, follows by a day or so another major loss for Public Citizen in the "Jones Day" litigation in which the Federal Court refused to even consider the arguments in the brief filed by Public Citizen, Paul Levy, and others, and found for Jones Day, and against Levy's position, by rejecting motions to dismiss the trademark infringement lawsuit filed by the mega-law firm over the use of its name online. Jones Day had earlier reportedly requested the Court to discard the Public Citizen brief on the grounds that Public Citizen's lawyers were biased.

Paul Levy, recently a labor lawyer relatively new to the online legal scene, has developed a reputation for publicly denouncing lawyers, judges, and anyone supporting legal interpretations with which he disagrees, and he continues to suffer legal setback after legal setback as his interpretations of the law are regularly rejected across the country by the Courts.

Earlier today, the Federal Court also reinstated the lawsuit filed by Dozier Internet Law against Ronald J. Riley by rejecting Levy's arguments and returning the case to State Court for further proceedings after Riley and Levy had removed it to Federal Court. Judge Henry Hudson declined to listen to oral arguments, and then stripped Riley and Public Citizen of Federal Jurisdiction.

The briefs and orders are available on the Pacer system. Although the issues were elementary and the deficiencies of the Riley and Public Citizen arguments obvious, the briefs are informative with respect to the interesting arguments and legal positions Levy continues to offer up to the online world.

Dozier Internet Law: $11.3 Million Sue Scheff Defamation Judgment Confirmed on Appeal

Dozier Internet Law is constantly battling the scofflaws of the web. On the one hand, the Internet as a whole opens up the world to everyone. On the other hand, it opens up the world to, well...to everyone. Defamation laws and related judicial interpretations evolved historically at a time, and in an environment, in which there were inherent protections that served as a filter of sorts. Today those protections are lost to the ability to distribute attacks to millions overnight. Want to physically picket a business? You have to invest time and disclose your identity if you are going to coordinate and show up at a business. Want to print and distribute flyers, or take out an advertisement or run a commercial? Expensive, of course. And newspapers and television wouldn't print, even as ads or commercials, alot of the outrageous claims and statements being readily distributed online.

Once in a while, Dozier Internet Law sees comments encouraging such illegality from what might seem to be credible sources. But the application and interpretation of laws dealing with disparagement and defamation and other lawlessness will eventually catch up with the online scofflaws, and defending misconduct by claiming you saw a blog by a lawyer saying it was legal is not a defense.

On October 15, 2008 the District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida just rejected an appeal from the Defendant and confirmed a JURY judgment on behalf of Susan Scheff in the sum of $11.3 Million, of which $5 Million was for punitive damages (on behalf of Susan Scheff and her very small business), against an individual who took it upon herself to publish allegedly defamatory statements online. Read the plaintiff's comments by Sue Scheff about "free speech".

Online defamation and product disparagement is a huge issue, of course, and businesses are under attack. This judgment is just another example of the legal system catching up with online misconduct. And instead of a real attempt to establish standards and self police and self regulate, one blogger organization has started selling insurance to bloggers. It strikes me that insurance coverage is a wonderful thing for the businesses under attack. At Dozier Internet Law we hear from dozens of victims of online blog attacks each week, it seems. The possibility of insurance coverage is great. Online defamation promises to be a growth industry for trial lawyers. Another example, I surmise, of an unanticipated and unintended consequence...but this time of mammoth proportions.

Sue Scheff Continues to Be a Voice Against Internet Abuse

Since winning my unprecedented lawsuit in September 2006 - with a jury verdict for damages done to my family, my organization and myself - over $11M - I am contacted on a daily basis from other victims of Internet Harassment, Abuse, Slander and Defamation.

This is a growing problem with today's expanding Cyberspace and more and more businesses being rated online. It has been stated that many time that many clients, when they seen negative posts on someone or a business, will usually not take the time to find out if it is Internet Gossip or fact.

I have heard from small business owners who have filed bankruptcy, struggling professionals that had one client or former employee take revenge with the keypad, as well as potential job applicants not getting a job after a firm did an Online Search. This is becoming a serious problem and needs to be addressed.

For those that believe that free speech will condone defamation, think twice - and read about my case. This is not about free speech - this is about people intentionally and maliciously destroying others with a few keystrokes in what is being called E-Venge.

I continue to answer as many emails as I can hoping to give others the support in the fact they are not alone.

The Web is Not Anonymous

My case and the unprecedented jury verdict for damages of over $11M has gained national and international attention. There are more and more people now fighting back against Cyberbullying and Internet Harassment.Take a moment to find out more about Internet Defamation and Invasion of Privacy.

Read More about how The Web is Not Anonymous by Dozier Internet Law:

Dozier Internet Law: The Web is Not Anonymous

Dozier Internet Law chases a lot of scofflaws. Sometimes the subject matter is copyright infringement, sometimes trademark infringement, often hacking and defamation. A reporter interviewing me last week was surprised to learn that individuals posting information online were not entitled to absolute anonymity and was surprised that you could subpoena information to identify the source of the publication of defamatory information in the airline industry. That got me to thinking a little about the knowledge base of most netizens.Yes, you can be identified.

For every instance in which Public Citizen wins a case preventing the disclosure of the identity, I suspect they turn down dozens of cases they know they can't win. There is no absolute right to privacy or anonymity online. Identities are disclosed everyday in litigation through a process called "discovery". And most people leave pretty good tracks.

If the plaintiff is obviously going to lose the case, the courts won't let the plaintiff use discovery to identify a defendant. But if the case is arguably valid, there is no problem with issuing extensive and far ranging discovery to locate and identify a defendant. And it is a process used often by lawyers, but an issue not publicized by the extreme left wingers very often. That way, each "victory" they claim sounds significant. But most, frankly, are irrelevant or at least not significant.

At Dozier Internet Law we go after these anonymous types often, and with great success. Rarely does Public Citizen get involved. When they do, their involvement is an anomaly. We don't publicize all of the cases in which we are identifying, through discovery, anonymous scofflaws, but from the volume of press release type emails and blog entries flowing from Public Citizen, I can understand this reporter's misunderstanding.

Sue Scheff: Top Ten Blogger Personas: The Mobosphere Unveiled by Attorney John Dozier

This has been one of my favorite Blogs and Articles describing a variety of personalities of people that simply have nothing better to do than harm others with their evil keystrokes.

Top Ten Blogger Personas: The Mobosphere Unveiled

By John Dozier, Esq.


Ever since Congress passed Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act giving immunity to interactive service providers for publishing the defamation of others, a wide range of characters has arisen and infiltrated the mainstream blogosphere. Instead of becoming a source for obtaining reliable information, the blogosphere, and user generated content, is at risk of becoming a less credible information source. Dozier Internet Law defamation lawyers are constantly battling these “black hat” forces and over the past several years we have acquired quite an insight into this underworld; an anonymous and covert society bent on terrorizing businesses. These are our internal thoughts on the matter, and not scientific analyses. We are not psychiatrists; just defamation lawyers and trial lawyers trained for almost fifty years to figure out the human nature of clients, witnesses, and juries.

All too often blog attacks are simply protection rackets and extortion schemes in disguise. We have been working on documenting the organizational structure and operational methodologies used by these racketeers. For now, let’s take a look at the entire panoply of characters we seem, as business defamation lawyers, to run into. For those businesses under attack, it is essential that you first identify the publisher’s persona and motivation before beginning to identify the proper strategies for addressing his often seemingly legitimate posts. We don’t go into details on how we work with clients to deal with each type of personality, but the tools vary considerably from being passive, to utilizing SEO services, to implementing reputation management initiatives, to pre-litigation and lawsuit actions.

Defamation Lawyers Pursue Bloggers

Pickpocket

This is the guy who used to wait on street corners for elderly ladies to pass. He enjoys attacking defenseless people and stealing covertly using deception. This type of blogger will steal your copyright protected content, have the search engines push your prospective clients to his site, and then run ads and otherwise direct the traffic to your competitors. He could be an affiliate marketer for a competitor getting a share of the revenue, or he could simply be running Google or Yahoo ads on his site. Pickpockets also take great pleasure in stealing your trademarks…surreptitiously using your mark in hidden tags, meta tags, hidden redirect pages, or through a myriad of search engine optimization techniques, all in the hopes of re-directing your prospects to a competitor and taking money from you.

Wacko

We usually identify a wacko situation quickly. There are distinctive characteristics of his communications. The wacko is usually a “follower”, someone looking to gain attention and recognition, but escalates what may have started as fair criticism into more and more outrageous claims. Most sophisticated business people immediately view the poster as a “nut case”, particularly when an excessive amount of time or energy disproportionate to the merits of the subject is expended. But it is not easy for the typical browser on the web to see the pattern, usually spread over multiple web properties.

Druggie

Or, maybe “liquid courage” would be more appropriate. This guy is exactly what comes to mind. During the day this blogger is a normal guy, but at night he returns to the sanctity of his home, gets drunk or high, and goes out on the web looking for “hook-ups” and blogging on his “hang-ups”. This guy is hard to detect as a fraudster, and sometimes won’t recall what he said online the next day while under the influence. He posts aggressive, false and arbitrary attacks on whatever issue of the day (or night) catches his fancy.

Alien

No, not from another world. But from overseas. In a far, far away place, without any treaty with the US, in a country without an effective legal system and no notion of business or personal property ownership rights. Many of these types operate out of certain Russian provinces, but the blogs, postings and communications appear to be from the customer down the street. This individual usually has an ulterior motive, often working with the criminal discussed below. He has no fear, until he takes a vacation to Turkey and US federal agents grab him for extradition, which is exactly what happened on a case in the not so recent past.

Nerd

This is the guy who is scared to talk with a girl, but behind the keyboard, all alone, morphs into a Casanova. This empowerment of anonymity creates an omnipotent persona, and for the first time the nerd feels the effect of power and control, gets an adrenaline buzz when he exercises it, and he exercises it often, usually creating or perpetuating a volatile situation in which he feels he can outsmart the “opposition”. There is no principle involved. His blog postings are all about the adrenaline. It is hard to know if you are dealing with this type online…his posts are intelligent and on their face credible. But, once you identify the nerd blogger, he cowers and goes away, usually forever.

Rookie

Enjoy debating a thirteen year old? They are out on the net acting like adults, posting statements and play-acting like a grown-up. The challenge, of course, is that most people reading the posts have no idea these are coming from a kid. The tip off can be the utter immaturity of the posts, but most often the kids can sound credible criticizing, for instance, a CPA's method of calculating RIO on REIT holdings, because they can mimic earlier posts. There is no insidious motive here; just kids having fun as the hormones kick in. But the readers of the blog posting don’t know that.

Sadist

This person attacks others, causes pain, and revels in the results in ways not worthy of mention. He loves to create, direct, control, and unleash a firestorm of criticism about a company just to create pain and damage. This type of person may often by the prime instigator of the online attacks, and tightens the noose by escalating the attack rapidly, almost as if in an obsessive state. You will find a sadist going to many sites and blogging, and he usually lets you know it was him because he uses his real moniker. He has characteristics of a stalker, and he is most likely to be the one that starts recommending direct physical violence against the executives of a company. This person is not motivated by money, but by the pure enjoyment of pain being visited upon innocent parties.

Bankrupt

No, not morally bankrupt. Actually bankrupt…no money, no assets, no prospects for work, and nothing to lose. These bloggers post without fear of the consequences or any regard for the truth because you “can’t get blood out of a turnip”, you “can’t get water from a rock”, and all these other sayings handed down, we surmise, through his generations. This is usually not a smart guy, but his postings are damaging and inflammatory. Many will own and control blogs without any concern about the consequences of liabilities that might arise through the perpetuation and “enhancement” of posts, and sometimes will post to their own blog and act like it was from a third party.

Criminal

Career criminals, no less. Like the convicted felon running a sophisticated extortion scheme against a very prominent business. Or the owner of an open blog avoiding service of process with guard dogs protecting his compound. The thieves and crooks of the world are online today; and the criminals often have both an organization and a highly effective and surprisingly coordinated operational plan in place to target a business. Rumors of $500,000 a year payoffs seem to promote this problem, which emanates from more of a “mobosphere” than the blogosphere.

Mis-Leader

This person is in no manner a leader. This blogger has a hidden agenda, but he just makes it sound like he is a totally objective commentator. He can create an appearance of authority and the casual visitor to his blog does not question the legitimacy. This type of persona is hard to figure out. One of the most pervasive practices is to control a blog and allow negative posts against all except his generous advertisers. Another common technique involves omission; not disclosing conflicts of interest or the existence of a business or personal relationship because the readers of the blog would totally discount the commentator’s posts as unreliable and biased.

Dozier Internet Law Defamation Lawyers

In closing, most of the blogosphere is legitimate, offers honest opinions and comments that add value to an open dialogue, and is an excellent example of the exercise of constitutionally protected free speech. As business defamation lawyers, we seen another side. The “mobosphere”, on the other hand, operates outside of the spotlight and often uses reckless, irresponsible, false and defamatory statements for personal or professional gain, all too often focused on self gratification and pecuniary benefits. As businesses attempt to leverage user generated content (“UGC”) into a valuable tool in the Web 2.0 environment, the proliferation of the scofflaws interrupting the free flow of credible speech in the online world puts at risk the reputation and integrity of UGC and raises the very real risk that consumers will begin viewing web content with disdain and suspicion.

Dozier Internet Law defamation lawyers offer a free consultation to qualified businesses and professionals undergoing attacks from the scofflaws of the web.

Sue Scheff: The Web is Not Anonymous

My case and the unprecedented jury verdict for damages of over $11M has gained national and international attention. There are more and more people now fighting back against Cyberbullying and Internet Harassment.Take a moment to find out more about Internet Defamation and Invasion of Privacy.

Read More about how The Web is Not Anonymous by Dozier Internet Law:


The Web is Not Anonymous

Dozier Internet Law chases a lot of scofflaws. Sometimes the subject matter is copyright infringement, sometimes trademark infringement, often hacking and defamation. A reporter interviewing me last week was surprised to learn that individuals posting information online were not entitled to absolute anonymity and was surprised that you could subpoena information to identify the source of the publication of defamatory information in the airline industry. That got me to thinking a little about the knowledge base of most netizens.

Yes, you can be identified. For every instance in which Public Citizen wins a case preventing the disclosure of the identity, I suspect they turn down dozens of cases they know they can't win. There is no absolute right to privacy or anonymity online. Identities are disclosed everyday in litigation through a process called "discovery". And most people leave pretty good tracks. If the plaintiff is obviously going to lose the case, the courts won't let the plaintiff use discovery to identify a defendant. But if the case is arguably valid, there is no problem with issuing extensive and far ranging discovery to locate and identify a defendant. And it is a process used often by lawyers, but an issue not publicized by the extreme left wingers very often. That way, each "victory" they claim sounds significant. But most, frankly, are irrelevant or at least not significant.

At Dozier Internet Law we go after these anonymous types often, and with great success. Rarely does Public Citizen get involved. When they do, their involvement is an anomaly. We don't publicize all of the cases in which we are identifying, through discovery, anonymous scofflaws, but from the volume of press release type emails and blog entries flowing from Public Citizen, I can understand this reporter's misunderstanding.

Sue Scheff: Free Speech Won't Support Online Defamation - $11.3M Jury Verdict for Damages

Since winning my unprecedented case against Internet Defamation, many people contact me looking for lawyers that specialize in Internet Law.

David Pollack, Miami, FL - was my attorney that won the $11.3M jury verdict for damages. Visit his website at http://www.davidpollacklaw.com/

John Dozier, Washington D.C. and offices in NY and CA- specializes in Internet Law and more. Visit his comprehensive website at http://www.cybertriallawyer.com/Internet Law is a growing area - and more and more lawyers are learning more about this.

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=_h0479er.doc&DocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=0479&Session=2003

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=9976

Thanks to the new Cyberbullying laws, this can help more plaintiffs take a strong stand against being harassed online without infringing on their first amendment.If you don't need a lawyer, I continue to recommend ReputationDefender as an alternative or in combination with a lawyer.

Sue Scheff: Keeping Your Profile Clean

Keeping Your Profile Clean By Elizabeth Ody

Since winning an unprecedented jury verdict of over $11M for Internet Defamation and Invasion of Privacy, more and more people are learning about the valuable services of companies like ReputationDefender.

In today's CyberWorld - it only takes a few keystrokes to potentially ruin lives and businesses. I will continue to be a voice to help others and help promote Internet Safety.

Maintaining Your Online Reputation

As both a victim and now a survivor of Online Attacks, Internet Defamation, Cyberstalkers from extremely disturbed people (in my opinion) I have fought back and won! In an unprecedented jury verdict for damages, I was awarded $11.3M for what one woman did to me online. The jury took time to read the hundreds of posts of clear defamation and slander in an attempt to destroy me, my organization and hurt my family.

In many interviews I have been asked ”why” do people find the need to hurt others? I simply don’t have that answer. We can speculate, but I believe deep down people are not happy with themselves and feel the need to project their misery on to others.

John Dozier of Dozier Internet Law wrote an excellent article the outlines potential persona’s of these type of people. “The Top Ten Blogger Persona’s: The Mobosphere Unvieled.” Then Jacqui Cheng wrote about the Nutjobs that feel the need to hurt others online. It is obvious this is a growing problem.

Read more about Online Reputation and Personal Responsibility.

Take the time to protect your online reputation - if you need to reach out for help, Reputation Defender is one of the services today that has helped protect many people and takes extra steps to protect our children with MyChild.

Sue Scheff: Rising Above Internet Defamation

Fighting against Internet Defamation can be an uphill battle - but there is finally light coming through. I meet with a Florida Senator for our second meeting today and a very prominent lawyer joined us.

Free Speech will always be in place, but it will not allow defamation or reckless regard for the truth.

I will continue to be a voice in this arena and hopefully you will see some major changes and new legal avenues and ACTION soon.