You guys are OK with publicly calling out someone and posting their license plate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am the PP who has posted that an invasion of privacy, if proven, constitutes defamation. I am a lawyer with experience in the area of defamation on the Internet.

Please go back to wiping ass, doing laundry, and cooking meals. You are clearly a SAHM, probably in VA, who watches too many episodes of Desperate Housewives and thus, believes that outrageous behavior has no consequences. You know not of what you speak. Now go on and get to the grocery store. Don't forget your coupons.

As a lawyer, with that kind of experience, I'm sure you understand the need to support legal conclusions. So, please provide a citation. We'll wait.

[Anonymous]

Unless you would like to pay me my fee to share my expertise with you, I'm afraid you'll have to attempt your own homework.

[Anonymous]

Yes of course. We all know that any intelligent woman would hang around the side of the road in the dark with some strange man calling her a bitch over a non-event.

Why do you insult single women living alone? I don't happen to be one anymore, and do remember its vulnerabilities. I also remember enjoying the freedom to come and go as I liked, have sex as ii liked, had friends over whenever i wanted but without obligation, my own condo and, whenever I sought it, peace and quiet.

To everything there is a season. Turn, turn, turn...

[Anonymous]

I am the PP who has posted that an invasion of privacy, if proven, constitutes defamation. I am a lawyer with experience in the area of defamation on the Internet.

Please go back to wiping ass, doing laundry, and cooking meals. You are clearly a SAHM, probably in VA, who watches too many episodes of Desperate Housewives and thus, believes that outrageous behavior has no consequences. You know not of what you speak. Now go on and get to the grocery store. Don't forget your coupons.

Not even close.

Look, if you knew what you were talking about, you would not need to throw around insults, first of all. You'd have case law citations that are relevant to the examples discussed in this thread and the original this is based on, if, you know, you actually had legal "experience in the area of defamation on the Internet." Your posts show that you don't. If you did, you would know that there are many jurisdictions seeking to enact laws about Internet defamation, but so, far, nothing exists that is enforceable or is expected to survive a constitutional challenge for the types of behavior people have been discussing here, like posting an offensive parker's plate number on the internet.

The only legal progress, as it were, is in addressing issues of classical defamation that are spread via the Internet. If someone does something that rises to the level of legal slander or defamation, and then distributes that something via the Internet, the ISP can be made to remove it and a poster can be held accountable. What you seem to fail to understand is that photos of plates that park badly, photos of nannies on their phones at the playground, photos of the car who cut you off, or a photo if you with a see through shirt on...do not meet the legal definition of defamation of slander. They don't. Ergo, it is not illegal to post them.

You may be a lawyer, but there is no way you practice in this area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course. We all know that any intelligent woman would hang around the side of the road in the dark with some strange man calling her a bitch over a non-event.

Why do you insult single women living alone? I don't happen to be one anymore, and do remember its vulnerabilities. I also remember enjoying the freedom to come and go as I liked, have sex as ii liked, had friends over whenever i wanted but without obligation, my own condo and, whenever I sought it, peace and quiet.

To everything there is a season. Turn, turn, turn...

I didn't. I insulted you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless you would like to pay me my fee to share my expertise with you, I'm afraid you'll have to attempt your own homework.

I think i've got a nickel here somewhere . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am the PP who has posted that an invasion of privacy, if proven, constitutes defamation. I am a lawyer with experience in the area of defamation on the Internet.

Please go back to wiping ass, doing laundry, and cooking meals. You are clearly a SAHM, probably in VA, who watches too many episodes of Desperate Housewives and thus, believes that outrageous behavior has no consequences. You know not of what you speak. Now go on and get to the grocery store. Don't forget your coupons.

Not even close.

Look, if you knew what you were talking about, you would not need to throw around insults, first of all. You'd have case law citations that are relevant to the examples discussed in this thread and the original this is based on, if, you know, you actually had legal "experience in the area of defamation on the Internet." Your posts show that you don't. If you did, you would know that there are many jurisdictions seeking to enact laws about Internet defamation, but so, far, nothing exists that is enforceable or is expected to survive a constitutional challenge for the types of behavior people have been discussing here, like posting an offensive parker's plate number on the internet.

The only legal progress, as it were, is in addressing issues of classical defamation that are spread via the Internet. If someone does something that rises to the level of legal slander or defamation, and then distributes that something via the Internet, the ISP can be made to remove it and a poster can be held accountable. What you seem to fail to understand is that photos of plates that park badly, photos of nannies on their phones at the playground, photos of the car who cut you off, or a photo if you with a see through shirt on...do not meet the legal definition of defamation of slander. They don't. Ergo, it is not illegal to post them.

You may be a lawyer, but there is no way you practice in this area.

You must watch a lot of Law and Order, but I am the lawyer, and you are not.

Defamation can be claimed when the facts are true. Claims for invasion of privacy are tied to defamation in many states. Be careful out there, you silly girl. Someone just may post a picture of you with your skirt up and poopy all of your thong. You don't know the law, and you probably can't manage to wipe your butt properly either. Or where to find proper thong. They are expensive. I can afford them, as I am a successful lawyer who knows how to sue people and win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course. We all know that any intelligent woman would hang around the side of the road in the dark with some strange man calling her a bitch over a non-event.

Why do you insult single women living alone? I don't happen to be one anymore, and do remember its vulnerabilities. I also remember enjoying the freedom to come and go as I liked, have sex as ii liked, had friends over whenever i wanted but without obligation, my own condo and, whenever I sought it, peace and quiet.

To everything there is a season. Turn, turn, turn...

I didn't. I insulted you.

No. You said that you were surprised I was no longer single and living alone. The implication is plainly that being a woman who is single and living alone is not a good thing to be. Did you mean to imply something else?

Most likely, you lived with your parents until you got married. Never had a chance to find yourself and be independent, let alone a profit on real estate. I had a good time before I settled down. And I didn't hang around the side of the road while deranged men called me name. That's what a pussy like you would do. As a man asks. Always.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless you would like to pay me my fee to share my expertise with you, I'm afraid you'll have to attempt your own homework.

I think i've got a nickel here somewhere . . .

Do your homework. It's close to bedtime. You can play with your piggy bank tomorrow honey.

[Anonymous]

You must watch a lot of Law and Order, but I am the lawyer, and you are not.

Defamation can be claimed when the facts are true. Claims for invasion of privacy are tied to defamation in many states. Be careful out there, you silly girl. Someone just may post a picture of you with your skirt up and poopy all of your thong. You don't know the law, and you probably can't manage to wipe your butt properly either. Or where to find proper thong. They are expensive. I can afford them, as I am a successful lawyer who knows how to sue people and win.

You presumably are refering to a false light invasion of privacy claim? That is similar to, but not the same thing as, a defamation claim.

And of course you can claim defamation when the facts are true. You'll lose, but you can make the claim.

Now get back to your document review.

[Anonymous]

No. You said that you were surprised I was no longer single and living alone. The implication is plainly that being a woman who is single and living alone is not a good thing to be. Did you mean to imply something else?

You apparently have a reading comprehension problem. What I posted was:

"I was single and living alone."

If your actual persona is anything like your internet persona, I'd be surprised if that's not still true.

That in no way implies anything about single women. It implies - fairly obviously - my astonishment that you found anyone willing to spend more that 30 minutes with you. Much less <shudder> live with you. Any reasonably intelligent person would pick up on that.

(To spell it out, it's because you appear to be fairly unpleasant. In case you missed that as well.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You must watch a lot of Law and Order, but I am the lawyer, and you are not.

Defamation can be claimed when the facts are true. Claims for invasion of privacy are tied to defamation in many states. Be careful out there, you silly girl. Someone just may post a picture of you with your skirt up and poopy all of your thong. You don't know the law, and you probably can't manage to wipe your butt properly either. Or where to find proper thong. They are expensive. I can afford them, as I am a successful lawyer who knows how to sue people and win.

You presumably are refering to a false light invasion of privacy claim? That is similar to, but not the same thing as, a defamation claim.

And of course you can claim defamation when the facts are true. You'll lose, but you can make the claim.

Now get back to your document review.

It may also be false light, depending on the circumstances. But an invasion of privacy an exist independently, and fall under the umbrella of a defamation claim.

I don't do document review. Unless the documents are very interesting to me, in which case I review them very thoroughly. Nothing about you interests me; you're a douche.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No. You said that you were surprised I was no longer single and living alone. The implication is plainly that being a woman who is single and living alone is not a good thing to be. Did you mean to imply something else?

You apparently have a reading comprehension problem. What I posted was:

"I was single and living alone."

If your actual persona is anything like your internet persona, I'd be surprised if that's not still true.

That in no way implies anything about single women. It implies - fairly obviously - my astonishment that you found anyone willing to spend more that 30 minutes with you. Much less <shudder> live with you. Any reasonably intelligent person would pick up on that.

(To spell it out, it's because you appear to be fairly unpleasant. In case you missed that as well.)

I may be unpleasant, but I am much more interesting to talk to than you will ever be. You stated that you were suprised that I was not still living alone. The implication, which you've now restated for us, is that happy, pleasant women do not live alone; unpleasant women with whom no one cares to speak for more than 30 minutes do. I do not buy your premise and find it insulting to single women, as would anyone who had taken a course in logic would.

I hope you have big tits. Then someone may want to spend, say, 5 minutes with you.

[Anonymous]

disagree with Jeff that because one piece of information is public or in public view, it's OK to post it in conjunction with other identifying information on DCUM. What you've then done is create a separate item of public information (pic and plate), which in turn can be used to find other pieces of information, and before you know it you've got a whole mosaic.

But it wasn't posted with "other identifying information." It was a picture of a car parked in public, with a license plate that was available for anyone in the public to view. The person's name, address etc. was not posted. There's nothing beyond what someone in your scenario would have gone to the DMV with in the first place - a plate number and type of car. I agree that it was a jerk move to post it (I also think it was a jerk move for the person to park that way, but that's besides the point). But I don't see how this is giving away any private information about the person.

[Anonymous]

I agree with the issue as you have framed it, but the discussion above contemplates the disclosure on the Internet of any and all information that is either in public view or accessed from any public source, no matter how obscure. I continue to maintain that the aggregation and publication of personal information that may be published or viewed in public, yet obscure sources or places, can constitute a common law claim for invasion of privacy. Such a claim is related to common law defamation claims, and is recognized in most states.

That is my professional opinion based on my professional experience. I have been quite generous, I think, in offering my opinion here as a caution to those who may not be aware of the legal implications of these actions. That some twit has the audacity to assert, without any substantiation whatsoever, that she can aggregate and publish any public information about anybody out there anywhere she wants without legal risk proves that she is a moron. Moreover, her demand that I must prove my assertions by sharing my attorney work-product shows that she also suffers from profound feelings of over-entitlement.

My name, address, and phone number is in the phone book and available to the public. I'll still sue anybody who takes such information and publishes it on DCUM. And I will win.

Keep pushing the envelope, lady. I am quite confident that you will not like the result.