6 ms·

The difference is, on these platforms you're rating legal entities. On Tea, you're rating, or rather sharing personal information about, an individual. Where I

The difference is, on these platforms you're rating legal entities. On Tea, you're rating, or rather sharing personal information about, an individual. Where I come from, sharing personal data of someone without their consent is not allowed.

bluescrn 1y ago
> On Tea, you're rating, or rather sharing personal information about, an individual. Or in this case, sharing personal information about yourself...
- Bilal_io 1y ago
  No, they'd be sharing the man's photo, name and phone number if I am not mistaken, and obviously without his consent.
voxic11 1y ago
I think its a mostly US based app, in the US sharing your opinion about other people is protected speech.
- const_cast 1y ago
  Sharing your opinion is protected speech, by lying is not always protected speech, particularly if done with the intent to financially hurt someone.
  - gitremote 1y ago
    Do you think a women's dating safety app is mainly about women lying and intending to hurt men, because it's rare for men to stalk or sexually assault women?
    - emseetech 1y ago
      I do. Not as an indictment of women but an indictment of social apps. Apps like this are way too hard to moderate, manage and verify. They quickly get swarmed by bad actors and misused. Again, not because women don't have genuine safety concerns in the dating world but because apps are not a viable way to manage those concerns. Some social problems just don't have technological solutions.
      - gitremote 1y ago
        Like online reviews, if 10 women reported that the same man was violent, would you see it as 10 data points or 0 data points that say nothing?
        emseetech 1y ago
        You know the answer to that is zero. There is no viable system a company, let alone a small unfunded startup, could use to verify the identity of the reporters let alone guarantee the trustworthiness of the account. Those ten reports could be made by one person. That one person might not even know the person they're accusing. That one person might be a man. That one person might be a bot. You'd have to ignore the last three decades of online identity, trolling and social media pitfalls to not recognize that. And please don't compare reviewing a can opener on Amazon to accusing someone anonymously of a heinous crime on an app built by one person. But I'm not sure I'm going to convince you with words so I'll suggest this: Go and build this app. Build it, see what happens. Nobody else has been able to crack this but maybe you can.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        philodeon 1y ago
        You’ve never read the story of the Halifax Slasher, have you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Slasher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Slasher
    - bawolff 1y ago
      That's not really relavent to whether someone is going to get sued for defamation. It might be relavent to who wins the lawsuit, but sometimes the mere existence of a lawsuit is pretty painful.
      - gitremote 1y ago
        Sure, and what was proposed was suing the women for warning others about an allegedly dangerous man, not suing the man.
        Levitz 1y ago
        >for warning others about an allegedly dangerous man I mean if witches didn't do anything surely they wouldn't be hunted down.
    - GoatInGrey 1y ago
      We grant a tremendous amount of leeway and power to accusations made by women against men in society today. There are always honest people using things for their intended purpose. Though they are also dishonest people using things for their own ulterior motives. A well-designed system will maximize utility for the former, and minimize utility for the latter. An app where women can leave what are practically anonymous reviews for men is not such a system.
    - xhkkffbf 1y ago
      I'm sorry and I'll be voted down for this, but I do think that it will attract plenty of fibbing and deliberate or not-so-deliberate stretching of the truth. Anyone who is rejected tends to be a bit angry about it. In this case, women who are ghosted can say whatever they want. This isn't all of the people, but in my experience in life it's more than enough to make this app impossible to filter.
    - qcnguy 1y ago
      A few days ago a video leaked of a woman riding in a Mexican taxi, who was demanding the driver went faster. He refused because it'd be dangerous, and she immediately started threatening to report him as a harasser to the police. She even said he had to speed up or else the police would be waiting for him when they got there. She didn't realize her whole conversation was recorded on camera. A lot of men have had experiences like this one. Either directly or they know someone it happened to. Yeah #NotAllWomen but way too many will exploit the feminist #BelieveAllWomen culture to gain even trivial benefits. An app devoted to letting women anonymous gossip and engage in reputation warfare without fear of consequence, or even fear that the man might reply in self defense, is going to get flooded with women like the taxi passenger.
      - 9dev 1y ago
        "A lot of men" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Go read some statistics on the number of women harassed, abused, raped, and killed every day—every single day—because they are women. Go ask your mother, your sister, your wife, your female best friend, when they had their last abusive encounter. Go ask your friends of both genders what the worst things are that could happen to them when walking home at night, and compare the responses. Go read some historic accounts of how women were treated for… pretty much all of history. Go look up news articles of what can happen to women when riding a taxi. Spoiler: it’s not just a threat. Yes, there are some abusive women out there. Yes, it’s fucked up when that happens to you. But trying to insinuate the levels of violence against men would be even remotely comparable is just plain awful.
        lazide 1y ago
        By the time a man has hit his 40’s, it is exceptionally uncommon he hasn’t seen someone hit with a false rape claim - or had one himself - by a vindictive ex. Or has been threatened with (or directly attacked) with physical violence. By people going on the same sort of rants like you just did. Some People are terrible, especially when they think they can act without consequences. Does that excuse men doing bad things too? No. But it sure does (or should!) make anyone with a brain question hyperbolic claims of abuse or violence without actual evidence.
    - Fogest 1y ago
      > Do you think a women's dating safety app is mainly about women lying That's not what it is intended for, but many people after relationships end can be extremely emotional and sometimes very spiteful. It's not uncommon for people to embellish or lie about the truth to make themselves look better and the other person look shitty. Especially if you're the one being dumped, you may be even more likely to engage in petty behaviour. I personally have experienced an ex making up a sexual assault story. This kind of app didn't exist then, but she even went as far as reporting me to the police. Luckily the police investigated and could easily discern it was a lie. Going to the police is obviously a much higher burden than using an app, and yet many females still go make false SA claims there. Do you really think it wouldn't be a common problem for people to do the same in an app at a much higher rate? People often believe things like SA claims without any evidence and will often even attack people trying to defend the person or insist on some kind of proof. It means that someone making up bull crap on these apps is going to be treated like it is true, yet the rates of lies would likely be pretty high. People can just be so crazy when it comes to relationships/love. Especially when it comes to people in their teens or early 20's, the brain isn't fully developed and dealing with these emotions is even more challenging and leads to even more rash decision making.
    - Mawr 1y ago
      > because it's rare for men to stalk or sexually assault women? The more common it is, the more damaging false claims of it are. It's a self-defeating linear relationship.
    - const_cast 1y ago
      [dead]
  - firefax 1y ago
    Devil's advocate, but how is saying someone is an unreliable romantic partner going to financially hurt someone? Maybe the reason I haven't had success in the policy arena is because I've been too kind, given recent events :-)
    - lazide 1y ago
      What words do you think a vindictive ex uses? I don’t think ‘unreliable romantic partner’ are any of them. I have seen false rape claims, false claims of child abuse, neglect, etc. With zero repercussions, of course.
    - parineum 1y ago
      If you're boss is on the app.
    - const_cast 1y ago
      I'm not sure, it depends case to case and what the court thinks. I think, generally, if you can prove it directly caused you to lose lots of money then you can make an argument.
- hyperliner 1y ago
  Not if it’s libel or slander, both which are generically defamation.
  - gitremote 1y ago
    It's not defamation if it's true. Why do you think women warning other women about rapey and stalker men are mostly lies? Even if it's only 5% of men, wouldn't the discussion focus on that dangerous 5% over persecuting the innocent 95%, as a matter of self-preservation?
    - GoatInGrey 1y ago
      An irony in this conversation is how normalized it is for women to be concerned about men as a demographic when it's only a small minority that inflict harm. While it's controversial for men to be concerned about women as a demographic when it's only a small minority that inflict harm. I still maintain my pet theory that this is a downstream effect of the normalization of paranoia around pedophiles that began hitting the mainstream in the '80s. The modern world is exceptionally safe, yet to the average person, it feels exceptionally dangerous. ...While I've got the hood up, I'll continue soapboxing. I've started seeing rare instances such as a young woman walking around a corner and there is a man rounding the same corner, surprising her by mistake, and the woman starts crying or breathing in a panicked way, unable to regulate herself for several minutes. It's not always walking around the corner at the same time, but there's a common pattern of being surprised by a man just going about his day and experiencing a severe fear response to that interaction. When I look at a lot of cultural related issues today, beyond just gender, I see many signs of pervasive psychological issues. I don't know what the solution is, but I'm very confident that the root cause is more complicated than something you can describe in a single sentence.
      - gitremote 1y ago
        > An irony in this conversation is how normalized it is for women to be concerned about men as a demographic when it's only a small minority that inflict harm. The same hypothetical 5% can inflict harm to multiple women, that's why multiple women and girls complained about Epstein and Trump.
- perihelions 1y ago
  But sharing *facts* about other people is potentially defamatory speech (in the American context). There's a not-at-all small nuance here: when you make concrete allegations about your personal experiences, you're not sharing an opinion—not sharing your subjective reaction to publicly-known information—rather you're introducing novel facts, provable objective facts, into the discussion—your version of those facts. And that comes with genuine legal risks. A remarkable fact that's stayed with me: Ken White (@popehat) once said that in his defamation law practice, his largest category of consultations was with clients who'd said negative things about a past romantic partner, who then threatened to sue. I believe his point was those negative things were true most of the time, but difficult to prove, or defend.
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    > But sharing facts about other people is potentially defamatory speech Yes, and? The service is protected in the US by Section 230, and Tea doesn't operate anywhere else currently. Individual users who use it defame are, in principal, subject to defamation liability, but in the US (and, again, that’s the only jurisdiction currently relevant), the burden to proving that the description was both false and at least negligently made (as well as the other elements of the tort) falls on the plaintiff (it is often said that “truth is an absolute defense”, but that’s misleading—falsity and fault are both elements of the prima facie case the plaintiff must establish.) Sure, in a jurisdiction with strict liability for libel and where truth is actually a defense, and/or where the platform itself, being a deep pockets target, was exposed, Tea would be a more precarious business. But that’s not where it operates.
    - perihelions 1y ago
      That's all true. I wasn't clear on the context of this thread, whether we were talking about the users or the platform.
    - TheOtherHobbes 1y ago
      The most obvious legal claim at the moment is that Tea was negligent about its security. I suspect that's going to be more of a problem for Tea than hypothetical individual defamation cases. Although having said that, how can you sue someone for defamation if you never find out you're being defamed? Any woman can say "Don't date [name], he's a bad person" and the victim will never know. Unless he asks a female friend for a social credit check, all [name] will see is a shrinking pool of opportunities.
- mjbroe02 1y ago
  That doesn't apply when you publish information for broad consumption. Then it becomes libel. People need to realize that posting on a site where you can reasonably expect that your words may be consumed by the masses makes you a publisher. That comes with responsibilities and is not protected the same way as an individual's personal speech.
- DocTomoe 1y ago
  So all I need to do to mark another guy (who might be, for example, competing for a job I want, or a certain woman's attention) as a rapist on a platform that's used by people in the location this guy lives in in the US is a (fake) female driver's license, a photo of the guy in question, and a name? coolcoolcool. I'm sure that never ever gets abused horrifically.
gitremote 1y ago
What was leaked was women's personal data, like driver's licenses. What they shared with each other was their experiences with men who sexually assaulted them or stalked them and their names, not the men's personal data. Men's driver licenses were not distributed online. Only women's driver licenses were distributed online.
- quietbritishjim 1y ago
  I'm not familiar with this app, but surely those accusations of sexual assault are only useful to other users of the men are sufficiently well identified?
  - gitremote 1y ago
    Name and photo.
    - 9dev 1y ago
      So… Personal data?
- tgsovlerkhgsel 1y ago
  The article says that what gets shared with the app is a picture of the man, and it's not just "those who sexually assaulted them or stalked them" but anyone they want feedback about. I assume the app then runs facial recognition. This may be legal in the US, but not under GDPR. Pictures of faces are biometric data (explicitly listed as such), which falls under additional restrictions beyond personally identifiable information. A drivers license with the picture blacked out would be less sensitive than the picture itself!
  - 9dev 1y ago
    > This may be legal in the US, but not under GDPR. This whole story is an amazing example of why the GDPR is correct about this, IMHO.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 1y ago
> Where I come from, sharing personal data of someone without their consent is not allowed. Where you come from, people arent allowed to share their own experiences interacting with third parties without the third parties consent? Sounds pretty oppressive, but there are absolutely many jurisdictions where that is not the case.
- ioasuncvinvaer 1y ago
  They post images of the men in question without consent.
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    Unless they are intimate images (in which case revenge porn laws are likely to apply), copyrightable images for which someone other than the poster is the creator posted without the copyright holder’s permission (in which case copyright applies), or being used for commercial promotion or to suggest endorsement (in which case, depending on which states law applies, state law right of personality/publicity, especially if the subject is a celebrity, might apply), that's generally legal in the US.
    - ohdeargodno 1y ago
      > that's generally legal in the US. Cool, I'm sure Tea is only available to report things about United States citiz... nevermind. It runs afoul of about a dozen european rights to privacy, imagery and consent laws. And that's just by posting pictures ! Libel and slander are a bunch of others, right to a response is also another... the list is long. It is, once again, yet another dudebro trying to skirt legality.
      - dragonwriter 1y ago
        > It runs afoul of about a dozen european rights to privacy, imagery and consent laws The EU is welcome to try to enforce its local laws on the US operations of a US business open only to US users, but I don’t think its going to have much success.
PaulHoule 1y ago
Also on those platforms you can see if people are trash talking you even if you don’t have a procedure to face your accuser. Even the open platforms creep me out. I don’t like seeing unverified accounts of crime in Nextdoor, I think if you see some crime you go to the police. I had a series of in person interactions with a woman which seemed creepy in retrospect, her Nextdoor was full of creepy stuff including screenshots of creepy online interactions. At least this gives everyone clear evidence they should keep away.
School-Cotton 1y ago
> Where I come from …is clearly not the US, which has probably the most expansive understanding of “freedom of speech” in the world.
- chneu 1y ago
  lol no it doesn't. american freedom is a bit of a joke but it's par for the course in the USA to make shit up and then defend it. The USA doesn't even rank in the top 15 on the human freedom index. Most freedom indices don't even put the USA in the top 20. A few don't even put the USA in the top 30.
  - throwaway48476 1y ago
    In my personal and equally arbitrary freedom index north korea is #1.
  - wqaatwt 1y ago
    I neither agree nor disagree with the specific point about the US but all those indexes are silly, pointless and shouldn’t be taken seriously. Also they have very little to do with “measuring” freedom of speech anyway.
- 9dev 1y ago
  So totally free, unless you criticise the empero… err, Trump or the government, of course. Or if you're against Israeli settlements. Or in favour of humane treatment of the People of Palestine. Or have information on the customers of Jeffrey Epstein. Or…
  - mvdtnz 1y ago
    Well I'm not American but I feel like all I have read for the last 8 months has been American organisations and American people criticising Trump, the US government and Israel. I am not aware of penalties for these orgs or people, do you have examples?
    - 1y ago

bluescrn 1y ago

> On Tea, you're rating, or rather sharing personal information about, an individual. Or in this case, sharing personal information about yourself...

Bilal_io 1y ago
No, they'd be sharing the man's photo, name and phone number if I am not mistaken, and obviously without his consent.

voxic11 1y ago

I think its a mostly US based app, in the US sharing your opinion about other people is protected speech.

const_cast 1y ago
Sharing your opinion is protected speech, by lying is not always protected speech, particularly if done with the intent to financially hurt someone.
- gitremote 1y ago
  Do you think a women's dating safety app is mainly about women lying and intending to hurt men, because it's rare for men to stalk or sexually assault women?
  - emseetech 1y ago
    I do. Not as an indictment of women but an indictment of social apps. Apps like this are way too hard to moderate, manage and verify. They quickly get swarmed by bad actors and misused. Again, not because women don't have genuine safety concerns in the dating world but because apps are not a viable way to manage those concerns. Some social problems just don't have technological solutions.
    - gitremote 1y ago
      Like online reviews, if 10 women reported that the same man was violent, would you see it as 10 data points or 0 data points that say nothing?
      - emseetech 1y ago
        You know the answer to that is zero. There is no viable system a company, let alone a small unfunded startup, could use to verify the identity of the reporters let alone guarantee the trustworthiness of the account. Those ten reports could be made by one person. That one person might not even know the person they're accusing. That one person might be a man. That one person might be a bot. You'd have to ignore the last three decades of online identity, trolling and social media pitfalls to not recognize that. And please don't compare reviewing a can opener on Amazon to accusing someone anonymously of a heinous crime on an app built by one person. But I'm not sure I'm going to convince you with words so I'll suggest this: Go and build this app. Build it, see what happens. Nobody else has been able to crack this but maybe you can.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - philodeon 1y ago
        You’ve never read the story of the Halifax Slasher, have you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Slasher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Slasher
  - bawolff 1y ago
    That's not really relavent to whether someone is going to get sued for defamation. It might be relavent to who wins the lawsuit, but sometimes the mere existence of a lawsuit is pretty painful.
    - gitremote 1y ago
      Sure, and what was proposed was suing the women for warning others about an allegedly dangerous man, not suing the man.
      - Levitz 1y ago
        >for warning others about an allegedly dangerous man I mean if witches didn't do anything surely they wouldn't be hunted down.
  - GoatInGrey 1y ago
    We grant a tremendous amount of leeway and power to accusations made by women against men in society today. There are always honest people using things for their intended purpose. Though they are also dishonest people using things for their own ulterior motives. A well-designed system will maximize utility for the former, and minimize utility for the latter. An app where women can leave what are practically anonymous reviews for men is not such a system.
  - xhkkffbf 1y ago
    I'm sorry and I'll be voted down for this, but I do think that it will attract plenty of fibbing and deliberate or not-so-deliberate stretching of the truth. Anyone who is rejected tends to be a bit angry about it. In this case, women who are ghosted can say whatever they want. This isn't all of the people, but in my experience in life it's more than enough to make this app impossible to filter.
  - qcnguy 1y ago
    A few days ago a video leaked of a woman riding in a Mexican taxi, who was demanding the driver went faster. He refused because it'd be dangerous, and she immediately started threatening to report him as a harasser to the police. She even said he had to speed up or else the police would be waiting for him when they got there. She didn't realize her whole conversation was recorded on camera. A lot of men have had experiences like this one. Either directly or they know someone it happened to. Yeah #NotAllWomen but way too many will exploit the feminist #BelieveAllWomen culture to gain even trivial benefits. An app devoted to letting women anonymous gossip and engage in reputation warfare without fear of consequence, or even fear that the man might reply in self defense, is going to get flooded with women like the taxi passenger.
    - 9dev 1y ago
      "A lot of men" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Go read some statistics on the number of women harassed, abused, raped, and killed every day—every single day—because they are women. Go ask your mother, your sister, your wife, your female best friend, when they had their last abusive encounter. Go ask your friends of both genders what the worst things are that could happen to them when walking home at night, and compare the responses. Go read some historic accounts of how women were treated for… pretty much all of history. Go look up news articles of what can happen to women when riding a taxi. Spoiler: it’s not just a threat. Yes, there are some abusive women out there. Yes, it’s fucked up when that happens to you. But trying to insinuate the levels of violence against men would be even remotely comparable is just plain awful.
      - lazide 1y ago
        By the time a man has hit his 40’s, it is exceptionally uncommon he hasn’t seen someone hit with a false rape claim - or had one himself - by a vindictive ex. Or has been threatened with (or directly attacked) with physical violence. By people going on the same sort of rants like you just did. Some People are terrible, especially when they think they can act without consequences. Does that excuse men doing bad things too? No. But it sure does (or should!) make anyone with a brain question hyperbolic claims of abuse or violence without actual evidence.
  - Fogest 1y ago
    > Do you think a women's dating safety app is mainly about women lying That's not what it is intended for, but many people after relationships end can be extremely emotional and sometimes very spiteful. It's not uncommon for people to embellish or lie about the truth to make themselves look better and the other person look shitty. Especially if you're the one being dumped, you may be even more likely to engage in petty behaviour. I personally have experienced an ex making up a sexual assault story. This kind of app didn't exist then, but she even went as far as reporting me to the police. Luckily the police investigated and could easily discern it was a lie. Going to the police is obviously a much higher burden than using an app, and yet many females still go make false SA claims there. Do you really think it wouldn't be a common problem for people to do the same in an app at a much higher rate? People often believe things like SA claims without any evidence and will often even attack people trying to defend the person or insist on some kind of proof. It means that someone making up bull crap on these apps is going to be treated like it is true, yet the rates of lies would likely be pretty high. People can just be so crazy when it comes to relationships/love. Especially when it comes to people in their teens or early 20's, the brain isn't fully developed and dealing with these emotions is even more challenging and leads to even more rash decision making.
  - Mawr 1y ago
    > because it's rare for men to stalk or sexually assault women? The more common it is, the more damaging false claims of it are. It's a self-defeating linear relationship.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    [dead]
- firefax 1y ago
  Devil's advocate, but how is saying someone is an unreliable romantic partner going to financially hurt someone? Maybe the reason I haven't had success in the policy arena is because I've been too kind, given recent events :-)
  - lazide 1y ago
    What words do you think a vindictive ex uses? I don’t think ‘unreliable romantic partner’ are any of them. I have seen false rape claims, false claims of child abuse, neglect, etc. With zero repercussions, of course.
  - parineum 1y ago
    If you're boss is on the app.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    I'm not sure, it depends case to case and what the court thinks. I think, generally, if you can prove it directly caused you to lose lots of money then you can make an argument.
hyperliner 1y ago
Not if it’s libel or slander, both which are generically defamation.
- gitremote 1y ago
  It's not defamation if it's true. Why do you think women warning other women about rapey and stalker men are mostly lies? Even if it's only 5% of men, wouldn't the discussion focus on that dangerous 5% over persecuting the innocent 95%, as a matter of self-preservation?
  - GoatInGrey 1y ago
    An irony in this conversation is how normalized it is for women to be concerned about men as a demographic when it's only a small minority that inflict harm. While it's controversial for men to be concerned about women as a demographic when it's only a small minority that inflict harm. I still maintain my pet theory that this is a downstream effect of the normalization of paranoia around pedophiles that began hitting the mainstream in the '80s. The modern world is exceptionally safe, yet to the average person, it feels exceptionally dangerous. ...While I've got the hood up, I'll continue soapboxing. I've started seeing rare instances such as a young woman walking around a corner and there is a man rounding the same corner, surprising her by mistake, and the woman starts crying or breathing in a panicked way, unable to regulate herself for several minutes. It's not always walking around the corner at the same time, but there's a common pattern of being surprised by a man just going about his day and experiencing a severe fear response to that interaction. When I look at a lot of cultural related issues today, beyond just gender, I see many signs of pervasive psychological issues. I don't know what the solution is, but I'm very confident that the root cause is more complicated than something you can describe in a single sentence.
    - gitremote 1y ago
      > An irony in this conversation is how normalized it is for women to be concerned about men as a demographic when it's only a small minority that inflict harm. The same hypothetical 5% can inflict harm to multiple women, that's why multiple women and girls complained about Epstein and Trump.
perihelions 1y ago
But sharing *facts* about other people is potentially defamatory speech (in the American context). There's a not-at-all small nuance here: when you make concrete allegations about your personal experiences, you're not sharing an opinion—not sharing your subjective reaction to publicly-known information—rather you're introducing novel facts, provable objective facts, into the discussion—your version of those facts. And that comes with genuine legal risks. A remarkable fact that's stayed with me: Ken White (@popehat) once said that in his defamation law practice, his largest category of consultations was with clients who'd said negative things about a past romantic partner, who then threatened to sue. I believe his point was those negative things were true most of the time, but difficult to prove, or defend.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  > But sharing facts about other people is potentially defamatory speech Yes, and? The service is protected in the US by Section 230, and Tea doesn't operate anywhere else currently. Individual users who use it defame are, in principal, subject to defamation liability, but in the US (and, again, that’s the only jurisdiction currently relevant), the burden to proving that the description was both false and at least negligently made (as well as the other elements of the tort) falls on the plaintiff (it is often said that “truth is an absolute defense”, but that’s misleading—falsity and fault are both elements of the prima facie case the plaintiff must establish.) Sure, in a jurisdiction with strict liability for libel and where truth is actually a defense, and/or where the platform itself, being a deep pockets target, was exposed, Tea would be a more precarious business. But that’s not where it operates.
  - perihelions 1y ago
    That's all true. I wasn't clear on the context of this thread, whether we were talking about the users or the platform.
  - TheOtherHobbes 1y ago
    The most obvious legal claim at the moment is that Tea was negligent about its security. I suspect that's going to be more of a problem for Tea than hypothetical individual defamation cases. Although having said that, how can you sue someone for defamation if you never find out you're being defamed? Any woman can say "Don't date [name], he's a bad person" and the victim will never know. Unless he asks a female friend for a social credit check, all [name] will see is a shrinking pool of opportunities.
mjbroe02 1y ago
That doesn't apply when you publish information for broad consumption. Then it becomes libel. People need to realize that posting on a site where you can reasonably expect that your words may be consumed by the masses makes you a publisher. That comes with responsibilities and is not protected the same way as an individual's personal speech.
DocTomoe 1y ago
So all I need to do to mark another guy (who might be, for example, competing for a job I want, or a certain woman's attention) as a rapist on a platform that's used by people in the location this guy lives in in the US is a (fake) female driver's license, a photo of the guy in question, and a name? coolcoolcool. I'm sure that never ever gets abused horrifically.

gitremote 1y ago

What was leaked was women's personal data, like driver's licenses. What they shared with each other was their experiences with men who sexually assaulted them or stalked them and their names, not the men's personal data. Men's driver licenses were not distributed online. Only women's driver licenses were distributed online.

quietbritishjim 1y ago
I'm not familiar with this app, but surely those accusations of sexual assault are only useful to other users of the men are sufficiently well identified?
- gitremote 1y ago
  Name and photo.
  - 9dev 1y ago
    So… Personal data?
tgsovlerkhgsel 1y ago
The article says that what gets shared with the app is a picture of the man, and it's not just "those who sexually assaulted them or stalked them" but anyone they want feedback about. I assume the app then runs facial recognition. This may be legal in the US, but not under GDPR. Pictures of faces are biometric data (explicitly listed as such), which falls under additional restrictions beyond personally identifiable information. A drivers license with the picture blacked out would be less sensitive than the picture itself!
- 9dev 1y ago
  > This may be legal in the US, but not under GDPR. This whole story is an amazing example of why the GDPR is correct about this, IMHO.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 1y ago

> Where I come from, sharing personal data of someone without their consent is not allowed. Where you come from, people arent allowed to share their own experiences interacting with third parties without the third parties consent? Sounds pretty oppressive, but there are absolutely many jurisdictions where that is not the case.

ioasuncvinvaer 1y ago
They post images of the men in question without consent.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  Unless they are intimate images (in which case revenge porn laws are likely to apply), copyrightable images for which someone other than the poster is the creator posted without the copyright holder’s permission (in which case copyright applies), or being used for commercial promotion or to suggest endorsement (in which case, depending on which states law applies, state law right of personality/publicity, especially if the subject is a celebrity, might apply), that's generally legal in the US.
  - ohdeargodno 1y ago
    > that's generally legal in the US. Cool, I'm sure Tea is only available to report things about United States citiz... nevermind. It runs afoul of about a dozen european rights to privacy, imagery and consent laws. And that's just by posting pictures ! Libel and slander are a bunch of others, right to a response is also another... the list is long. It is, once again, yet another dudebro trying to skirt legality.
    - dragonwriter 1y ago
      > It runs afoul of about a dozen european rights to privacy, imagery and consent laws The EU is welcome to try to enforce its local laws on the US operations of a US business open only to US users, but I don’t think its going to have much success.

PaulHoule 1y ago

Also on those platforms you can see if people are trash talking you even if you don’t have a procedure to face your accuser. Even the open platforms creep me out. I don’t like seeing unverified accounts of crime in Nextdoor, I think if you see some crime you go to the police. I had a series of in person interactions with a woman which seemed creepy in retrospect, her Nextdoor was full of creepy stuff including screenshots of creepy online interactions. At least this gives everyone clear evidence they should keep away.

School-Cotton 1y ago

> Where I come from …is clearly not the US, which has probably the most expansive understanding of “freedom of speech” in the world.

chneu 1y ago
lol no it doesn't. american freedom is a bit of a joke but it's par for the course in the USA to make shit up and then defend it. The USA doesn't even rank in the top 15 on the human freedom index. Most freedom indices don't even put the USA in the top 20. A few don't even put the USA in the top 30.
- throwaway48476 1y ago
  In my personal and equally arbitrary freedom index north korea is #1.
- wqaatwt 1y ago
  I neither agree nor disagree with the specific point about the US but all those indexes are silly, pointless and shouldn’t be taken seriously. Also they have very little to do with “measuring” freedom of speech anyway.
9dev 1y ago
So totally free, unless you criticise the empero… err, Trump or the government, of course. Or if you're against Israeli settlements. Or in favour of humane treatment of the People of Palestine. Or have information on the customers of Jeffrey Epstein. Or…
- mvdtnz 1y ago
  Well I'm not American but I feel like all I have read for the last 8 months has been American organisations and American people criticising Trump, the US government and Israel. I am not aware of penalties for these orgs or people, do you have examples?
  - 1y ago