GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

dj_sniffy · 06-11-2003, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by freeadultcontent

The sponsor and yourself are the only ones with the data, so either I am faced with being labeled a cheater or peddler of CP, or I fight this. I decide to fight this and take the sponsor to court. Do you think for one second your program would not be named in a suit as well? Do you think I would not get disclosure on your database for my case?

in the event of the situation you described, your attorney would subpenoa Sniffy (the 3rd party valditor) in your lawsuit against your sponsor. through discovery, sniffy would turn over to your attorney, not the database, but the screen shots of the web page infractions. the sponsor themselves, having received a qualified tip from Sniffy, would turn over whatever "evidence" they had collected to make their justifications.

It isn't liable, if it is true. If through documention, sniffy says it found CP, then it would up to the court to decide this. You are talking about an infraction that is in the criminal realm. People who give tips or leads to government officials are not liable. There are investigations done, etc. In the event that the sponsor is sued, they would provide their evidence, and sniffy would not be under a lawsuit charge.. for what? liable?

sniffy would hand over to the judge a CD with all of the website pages and images. please check this in as exhibit A.

If I win or loose your database is now public record.

public record? like you mean people will know about it? this is a public forum, people already know about the database. if you are saying that our database (the data) is now free for all to use, then you lost me on that one.

If the courts also found that your database provided the wrong information, do you honestly think the courts would just look the other way and just say you can only get damages from the company that used the false info?

actually yes, that is what i believe.

this theory of yours has already been tested in court.... some kid killed another kid. the kid said that heavy metal or rap music made him do it. mother sues the artist. court case gets dropped.

the issue of liability is with the sponsor, whether they got their information from sniffy or figured it out for themselves. having sniffy turn over discovery documents only goes to support the sponsors claim, and now leads the frivilous lawsuit towards criminal prosecution.

this is no different then if someone who didn't like you, said that you had CP images on your website, and they whispered it in the ear of a sponsor. the sponsor flips out and drops you. you, who did not have any CP, felt that you were framed, and therefore filed a lawsuit for breach of contract, wrongful termination, etc.

your attorneys get discovery information from the sponsor. the sponsor says they got a tip from someone. that person gets on the stand, credibility of the witness destroyed, the truth is revealed. who are the damages going to be accessed against? the sponsor.

sponsors have this liability anways. sniffy is an informant. if sniffy gives the red flag, then CP has been found. If we couldn't make that kind of statement, then we have no grounds for the service. CP is illegal. if CP is found, the webmaster is doing something illegal, it's that simple.

i understand the premise of your points, in saying that a webmaster could be wrongfully accused. How many people on death row say this? so we have a few, person was in the wrong place, at the wrong time, but for the majority of the other cases, they were guilty.

I can understand worrying about that small percentage that might be wrongfully accused. I am sure that goes on today along with mud slinging w/o sniffy's involvement. But those kinds of public mud dragging are rarely based on hard evidence. Here i am saying that if sniffy finds CP, it will have documentable evidence, along with more than just 1 person who deemd the site was CP (and who may have been under some influence as you described), but then other levels of people to confirm, then, finally, the sponsor makes the final confirmation.

The sponsors will check the evidence, check the website, and if all comes up CP, it's CP. We are talking about black and white, no shades of gray like keywords and meta tagging that give the appearance of CP.

so i don't understand your objections to sniffy if sniffy doesn't produce false-positives, who is to be harmed? the answer, the guilty webmaster.

-dj

06-11-2003, 02:49 PM
dj_sniffy Registered User Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 47	Originally posted by freeadultcontent The sponsor and yourself are the only ones with the data, so either I am faced with being labeled a cheater or peddler of CP, or I fight this. I decide to fight this and take the sponsor to court. Do you think for one second your program would not be named in a suit as well? Do you think I would not get disclosure on your database for my case? in the event of the situation you described, your attorney would subpenoa Sniffy (the 3rd party valditor) in your lawsuit against your sponsor. through discovery, sniffy would turn over to your attorney, not the database, but the screen shots of the web page infractions. the sponsor themselves, having received a qualified tip from Sniffy, would turn over whatever "evidence" they had collected to make their justifications. It isn't liable, if it is true. If through documention, sniffy says it found CP, then it would up to the court to decide this. You are talking about an infraction that is in the criminal realm. People who give tips or leads to government officials are not liable. There are investigations done, etc. In the event that the sponsor is sued, they would provide their evidence, and sniffy would not be under a lawsuit charge.. for what? liable? sniffy would hand over to the judge a CD with all of the website pages and images. please check this in as exhibit A. If I win or loose your database is now public record. public record? like you mean people will know about it? this is a public forum, people already know about the database. if you are saying that our database (the data) is now free for all to use, then you lost me on that one. If the courts also found that your database provided the wrong information, do you honestly think the courts would just look the other way and just say you can only get damages from the company that used the false info? actually yes, that is what i believe. this theory of yours has already been tested in court.... some kid killed another kid. the kid said that heavy metal or rap music made him do it. mother sues the artist. court case gets dropped. the issue of liability is with the sponsor, whether they got their information from sniffy or figured it out for themselves. having sniffy turn over discovery documents only goes to support the sponsors claim, and now leads the frivilous lawsuit towards criminal prosecution. this is no different then if someone who didn't like you, said that you had CP images on your website, and they whispered it in the ear of a sponsor. the sponsor flips out and drops you. you, who did not have any CP, felt that you were framed, and therefore filed a lawsuit for breach of contract, wrongful termination, etc. your attorneys get discovery information from the sponsor. the sponsor says they got a tip from someone. that person gets on the stand, credibility of the witness destroyed, the truth is revealed. who are the damages going to be accessed against? the sponsor. sponsors have this liability anways. sniffy is an informant. if sniffy gives the red flag, then CP has been found. If we couldn't make that kind of statement, then we have no grounds for the service. CP is illegal. if CP is found, the webmaster is doing something illegal, it's that simple. i understand the premise of your points, in saying that a webmaster could be wrongfully accused. How many people on death row say this? so we have a few, person was in the wrong place, at the wrong time, but for the majority of the other cases, they were guilty. I can understand worrying about that small percentage that might be wrongfully accused. I am sure that goes on today along with mud slinging w/o sniffy's involvement. But those kinds of public mud dragging are rarely based on hard evidence. Here i am saying that if sniffy finds CP, it will have documentable evidence, along with more than just 1 person who deemd the site was CP (and who may have been under some influence as you described), but then other levels of people to confirm, then, finally, the sponsor makes the final confirmation. The sponsors will check the evidence, check the website, and if all comes up CP, it's CP. We are talking about black and white, no shades of gray like keywords and meta tagging that give the appearance of CP. so i don't understand your objections to sniffy if sniffy doesn't produce false-positives, who is to be harmed? the answer, the guilty webmaster. -dj __________________ i can type, but i can't spel.