4 ms·

IANAL either, but the lawsuit doesn't say that TOR knows specifically about Pinkmeth. Instead the weasel words of "knowingly assists websites such as Pinkmeth

IANAL either, but the lawsuit doesn't say that TOR knows specifically about Pinkmeth. Instead the weasel words of "knowingly assists websites such as Pinkmeth (in committing torts)." (Page 3 of 30, or page 5 of the PDF). So not really a lie, but more just a paper-thin excuse that (again, IANAL) I wouldn't expect to really tie the TOR project to it, especially as TOR couldn't stop it if it wanted to. EDIT many edits

AlyssaRowan 12y ago
No evidence the Tor software project knowingly assists 'revenge porn' websites in general in committing torts, either: it publishes software! And see the 'meeting of the minds' part, beyond that, in the actions, p8. Hard to weasel around that. It's specific.
Intermernet 12y ago
On page 8 they bring up this up: "Pinkmeth and TOR conspired to and had a meeting of the minds regarding the commission certain torts against Plaintiff more adequately described in paragraphs 5.1 - 5.15 above, as well as certain felony offense described in paragraph 4.8 and 4.9 above. The specific object to be accomplished by the conspiracy was the publication pornographic images of Plaintiff (and other women) on the Pinkmeth website" I think "conspired" may be a little misguided here.
- coolj 12y ago
  INAL (but I play on one daytime TV): Their whole claim aginst TOR amounts to: pp. 2-3 "According to its website, TOR "was originally designed, implemented, and deployed as a third-generation onion routing project of the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory. It was originally developed with the U.S. Navy in mind, for the primary purpose of protecting government communications." The TOR website further states that their products and services are used by individuals "to keep websites from tracking them and their family members, or to connect to news sites, instant messaging services, or the like when these are blocked by their local Internet providers." TOR also provides services that permit users, such as Pinkmeth, to "publish web sites and other services without needing to reveal the location of the site." [...] It is clear from the TOR website that TOR is knowingly assisting websites such as Pinhneth in committing torts against Texas resident..." p. 5 "However, unscrupulous Internet service companies such as TOR offer "private" or "anonymous" domain name hosting services that allow criminals such as Pinkmeth and its users to escape accountability for their actions. TOR even advertises that with their service "nobody would be able to determine who was offering the site, and nobody who offered the site would know who was posting to it." [...] many unscrupulous companies offer services that allow illegal websites such as Pinkmeth to remain anonymous and difficult for authorities to shut down. Indeed Pinkmeth's Twitter feed advertises its website as being a website "where your state laws don't apply."" pp. 8-9 "The specific object to be accomplished by the conspiracy was the publication pornographic images of Plaintiff (and other women) on the Pinkmeth website in such a mannner so as to prevent its operators and users from being held civilly and criminally accountable for this unlawful behavior." This seems to be conflating a few things. The fact that "revenge porn" sites exist outside of anonymous content distribution networks like TOR shows that anonymity wasn't a required component in the tort allegedely commited by Pinkmeth. There are many cases involving sites like that being taken down from public hosting providers. The fact that TOR could allegedly allow defendant to escape prosecution does not equate to a real conspiracy to assist defendant in escaping prosecution. A person hosting a costume party isn't automatically responsible for a murderer taking advantage of the anonymity to commit a crime, without some evidence of collusion.
exelius 12y ago
IANAL myself; but it seems like some form of safe harbor provision applies here at a minimum. Tor (the organization) itself isn't even operating the network; they just write the software that other people then use. It's like suing Adobe in a defamation suit because someone used Photoshop to put your face on a porn star's body. Edit: After reading the rest of the suit, this is clearly a frivolous suit. The entire filing is pretty unprofessional overall; hopefully the EFF can step in and stop this nonsense.
err4nt 12y ago
Well, somebody made the camera those embarrassing pictures were taken with too…
- hnha 12y ago
  plus according to the offending site, she uploaded them to Facebook.

AlyssaRowan 12y ago

No evidence the Tor software project knowingly assists 'revenge porn' websites in general in committing torts, either: it publishes software! And see the 'meeting of the minds' part, beyond that, in the actions, p8. Hard to weasel around that. It's specific.

Intermernet 12y ago

On page 8 they bring up this up: "Pinkmeth and TOR conspired to and had a meeting of the minds regarding the commission certain torts against Plaintiff more adequately described in paragraphs 5.1 - 5.15 above, as well as certain felony offense described in paragraph 4.8 and 4.9 above. The specific object to be accomplished by the conspiracy was the publication pornographic images of Plaintiff (and other women) on the Pinkmeth website" I think "conspired" may be a little misguided here.

coolj 12y ago
INAL (but I play on one daytime TV): Their whole claim aginst TOR amounts to: pp. 2-3 "According to its website, TOR "was originally designed, implemented, and deployed as a third-generation onion routing project of the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory. It was originally developed with the U.S. Navy in mind, for the primary purpose of protecting government communications." The TOR website further states that their products and services are used by individuals "to keep websites from tracking them and their family members, or to connect to news sites, instant messaging services, or the like when these are blocked by their local Internet providers." TOR also provides services that permit users, such as Pinkmeth, to "publish web sites and other services without needing to reveal the location of the site." [...] It is clear from the TOR website that TOR is knowingly assisting websites such as Pinhneth in committing torts against Texas resident..." p. 5 "However, unscrupulous Internet service companies such as TOR offer "private" or "anonymous" domain name hosting services that allow criminals such as Pinkmeth and its users to escape accountability for their actions. TOR even advertises that with their service "nobody would be able to determine who was offering the site, and nobody who offered the site would know who was posting to it." [...] many unscrupulous companies offer services that allow illegal websites such as Pinkmeth to remain anonymous and difficult for authorities to shut down. Indeed Pinkmeth's Twitter feed advertises its website as being a website "where your state laws don't apply."" pp. 8-9 "The specific object to be accomplished by the conspiracy was the publication pornographic images of Plaintiff (and other women) on the Pinkmeth website in such a mannner so as to prevent its operators and users from being held civilly and criminally accountable for this unlawful behavior." This seems to be conflating a few things. The fact that "revenge porn" sites exist outside of anonymous content distribution networks like TOR shows that anonymity wasn't a required component in the tort allegedely commited by Pinkmeth. There are many cases involving sites like that being taken down from public hosting providers. The fact that TOR could allegedly allow defendant to escape prosecution does not equate to a real conspiracy to assist defendant in escaping prosecution. A person hosting a costume party isn't automatically responsible for a murderer taking advantage of the anonymity to commit a crime, without some evidence of collusion.

exelius 12y ago

IANAL myself; but it seems like some form of safe harbor provision applies here at a minimum. Tor (the organization) itself isn't even operating the network; they just write the software that other people then use. It's like suing Adobe in a defamation suit because someone used Photoshop to put your face on a porn star's body. Edit: After reading the rest of the suit, this is clearly a frivolous suit. The entire filing is pretty unprofessional overall; hopefully the EFF can step in and stop this nonsense.

err4nt 12y ago

Well, somebody made the camera those embarrassing pictures were taken with too…

hnha 12y ago
plus according to the offending site, she uploaded them to Facebook.