Sue Scheff: Google Bomb Book Featured in Washington Post
by Sue Scheff on Aug 26, 2009
I was so flattered and honored to speak with Columnist and Journalist, Kathleen Parker. She interviewed me yesterday and wrote an amazing column which included my new book book, Google Bomb, that is now available on Amazon and will be officially released on September 1st. The endorsements and reviews have been fantastic! There is a ground swell, and I believe we have the making of a best seller. The topic is timely and sizzling with the recent news on Google being forced to expose an anonymous Blogger.
Follow Google Bomb Book on Twitter @GoogleBombBook and @SueScheff
Shock Waves From the Google Bombs
By Kathleen Parker
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
When Oscar Wilde observed that the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about, he could not have imagined the Internet.
The wild frontier we now know and (mostly) love called the blogosphere is a not-always-okay corral where Free Speech is armed and often dangerous.
The latest showdown is between two women — a Vogue model and an anonymous blogger — at odds over what is permissible in the name of free expression. After the blogger called Liskula Cohen a “skank,” among other things, the model demanded her identity from the blog host, Google. A New York Supreme Court judge agreed that she was entitled to the information and ordered the company to reveal her name.
Outraged, the blogger, revealed as Rosemary Port, is launching a $15 million lawsuit against Google for disclosing her identity. Google’s Andrew Pederson said that while his company sympathizes with victims of cyber-bullying, “We also take great care to respect privacy concerns and will only provide information about a user in response to a subpoena or other court order.”
Voila.
This all may seem like an inside-the-runway spat between two women who don’t like each other. As pioneering blogger and law professor Glenn Reynolds noted on Instapundit, “I never would have heard the words ‘Liskula Cohen’ and ’skank’ together if it hadn’t been for her blogger-outing litigation efforts.”
The model case isn’t insignificant, however, and raises weighty questions about privacy, anonymity and the future of e-free speech.
The problem of online defamation is hardly new, but several recent lawsuits have begun challenging the anything-goes modus operandi of the Internet. One of the most famous dates to 2006, when Sue Scheff won a staggering $11.3 million verdict against a woman who had posted hundreds of defamatory comments about Scheff and her company, which counsels the parents of troubled teens.
After years of torment that included stalkers and death wishes, Scheff was able to prove that her reputation and business suffered as a result of the defendant’s comments. In her new book, “Google Bomb,” due for release Sept. 1 and co-authored with attorney John W. Dozier Jr., Scheff tells the story of her lawsuit and offers advice to others similarly defamed online.
“Google bomb” is Internet slang for attempting to raise the ranking of a given page during a Google search. The popularity of a page may not reflect the page’s relationship to truth, but it may be popular for other reasons. Let’s just say, nasty sells.
Defusing Google bombs isn’t much fun unless you’re a computer geek or have no preferable ways of spending your time. To keep your online profile positive and prominent, you have to blog, tweet and maintain Web sites — or hire someone to do it for you. Scheff says she resents having to do these things, but, “if you don’t own your own name, someone else will.”
Scheff considers herself lucky because she was able to hire an attorney as well as an Internet monitoring company, ReputationDefender, that manages her online persona. Others, hundreds of whom write her each week, aren’t so fortunate. In one example, a wedding photographer lost his business when a single unhappy bride went ‘zilla and trashed him online.
“No one is immune,” says Scheff. And, just because you’re not personally active on the Internet doesn’t mean that your persona isn’t online — not necessarily in a good way. The Internet has unleashed that part of ourselves that we used to keep under wraps. Dark thoughts, like the trolls of Mordor, can now surface and thrive by the light of day.
The freedom granted by anonymity and a virtual audience may have been a boon to democracy, affording everyone a voice, but it has been a plague on decency. Inhibition, we lament, is an undervalued virtue.
Scheff’s case and the Cohen incident suggest that a new level of accountability, largely missing from personal blogs, may be in the offing. “What you type today can haunt you tomorrow,” says Scheff. “People need to know that if you use your mouse and keypad to harm others, there is a price tag.”
Harm is the operative word. Although Scheff was able to prove material losses, Cohen likely gained from her brief tenure as a victim. In fact, she has dropped her lawsuit and forgiven the blogger.
No one likes being bashed online or elsewhere — and public people are familiar with the experience. But even Scheff thinks that in the absence of quantifiable defamation, anonymity deserves protection. As Google and the courts slug it out, Cohen did manage to render an oft-ignored lesson in bold italics: Think before you type.
Or else someone may want more than a penny for your thoughts.
Tags: Cyber Safety, Cyber Slander, Cyberbullying, Free Speech, Google Bomb Book, Google Image, Internet Defamation, Internet Gossip, Internet Law, Invasion of Privacy, Online Profile, Reputation Defender, Sue Scheff
Sue Scheff: Support Nikki – A Tribute to Nikki Catsouras
by Sue Scheff on May 21, 2009
When a family loses a child, I can’t even imagine the pain they endure. How they wake up the next day, how they feel, what they feel and how they go on with life. When a family loses a child in a tragic accident it seems it could only compound all the feelings of loss.
On October 31, 2006 the Catsouras family experienced the nightmare every parent fears – losing a teen in a tragic automobile accident.
The accident was the beginning of an emotional roller coaster. If you haven’t heard about this story, it is time to take a moment and help make a difference. Nikki Catsouras, after having a horrific car accident was dead on impact, the scene was described as shocking as Nikki’s head was nearly decapitated.
Can you even imagine as a parent, learning of this? Can you imagine living through this? As a parent advocate and a parent of two young adults now, I couldn’t even begin to imagine what this family has gone through.
What follows next is nothing short of evil, in my opinion. Shortly after Nikki was buried, her parents and sisters still in mourning, the Internet creeped into their lives in the most heinous way. Photo’s of Nikki’s crime scene were posted online! Yes, their daughter’s body, or what was left of it, was going viral! Where is justice? Who in God’s name would do this?
Please take a moment to read “A Tribute to Nikki Catsouras” and sign the petition to help create reasonable protection for personal privacy on the Internet.
Read Newsweek Updated Story on Nikki Catsouras – http://www.newsweek.com/id/199152
Tags: Cyber Abuse, Cyber Law, Free Speech, Internet Law, Internet Slander, Internet Slime, Michael Fertik, Nikki Catsouras, Online Abuse, Reputation Defender
Dozier Internet Law: New Laws Are Coming
by Sue Scheff on Dec 16, 2008
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
Tags: Cyber Law, Dozier Internet Law, Free Speech, Internet Defamation, Internet Law, Internet Lawyers, Internet Slander, John Dozier, Online Law, Online Slander, Sue Scheff
Sue Scheff: Dozier Internet Law – Top Ten Blogger Personas: The Mobosphere Inveiled
by Sue Scheff on Nov 30, 2008
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.
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.
Tags: Blogger Abuse, Blogger Persona's, Cyber Slander, Dozier Internet Law, Free Speech, Internet Defamation, Internet Gossip, Internet Law, Internet Lawyers, Internet Slander, Online Harassment, Sue Scheff
Sue Scheff – Victorious Again – Confirming Free Speech Will Not Condone Internet Defamation
by Sue Scheff on Nov 25, 2008
Remember Blogging is fun, free speech will always be here, but it will not condone defamation.
Back in September 2006, I was awarded over $11.3M jury verdict for damages. They were defamatory and false statements about my organization, myself and my family posted online.
I fought back, and won – the truth prevailed! The defendant attempted to have the judgment set aside – although she was firmly denied in July 2007, she filed an appeal.
It is official – she loses again in the appellate court, and the $11.3M judgment stands firm!
Free speech is still in tact, but it will not condone defamation.
Remember, think before your post – sometimes keystrokes can be costly!
Tags: Cyber Slander, Free Speech, Freedom of Speech, Internet Defamation, Internet Law, Internet Slander, Online Harassment, Sue Scheff, Sue Scheff v Carey Bock
