Marc Randazza Goes To War Against Revenge Porn Site Over Alleged 'Takedown Lawyer' Business Model
from the got-it-all? dept
Well, well. Last year, there was a lot of attention paid to a so-called "revenge porn" site called "Is Anyone Up"? The site reposted submitted nude photos, linked to the person in the photo's social networking accounts. The "idea" (a horrific one) was that spurned people, who had naked photos of their ex's, could publicize them. Not surprisingly, many people were completely horrified by the concept and the media coverage was not kind. The site eventually went down, but others popped up to take their place. Lawyer Marc Randazza has decided to go to war with one of them, which uses the very similar name "Is Anybody Down" (and, no, I'm not linking to it). Randazza points out that he has no problem with porn or porn sites, but when the participants are not consenting (and not necessarily adults) he has serious problems.However, his main issue with this other site is in what he believes to be its sneaky business model. There is apparently an "advertisement" on the site for a "lawyer" named David Blade, who will help you get your photos off the site for $250. Randazza argues that it's really the site's own business model:
Here’s their business plan:The "ad" goes on at length about how successful "David Blade" is in removing images from the site, and how it's much cheaper than going to any other lawyer. Blade has his own website, called TakedownLawyer.com. Randazza has a few damning facts. The registration info for both sites... are by the same person. The "ad" by "Blade" insists that they're different people, with Blade claiming to merely be a college friend of the operator of the site -- and someone who disapproves of the site. "Blade" claims that as he's tried to convince the operator of the site to take it down, their "compromise" is that the site owner has allowed him to place that "ad" that just so happens to help "Blade" make money any time someone wants their images down from the site. The other bit of damning evidence? There is no record of a David Blade as a registered NY attorney (where he claims to operate). Oops.
Step one: Register the domain name “isanybodydown.com”
Step two: Get ahold of nude photos of people who never consented to having their photos published.
Step three:Publish them, along with their names, home towns, and links to their facebook profiles.
So now how do you “profit?”
Well, openly saying “I’ll take down the photo for $250,” would probably create some legal issues for you. So, instead, you create a fake lawyer persona and say “I am an internet lawyer, named David Blade, III, and I’ll get your pics down for $250.”
In an email discussion (pdf) with "Blade," he insists that he really is a lawyer, but that Blade isn't his real name. That, too, is a big issue, since lawyer advertising is pretty heavily regulated, and one of the common requirements is having your real name and contact info. Randazza points to the NY law to that effect, and "Blade" (still using that name despite admitting it's not real), insists there's no violation since he's not engaging in "case law, civil law or trial law," but merely doing "mitigated/mediated takedowns, which are not considered to be a legal service."
Of course, soon after this exchange, the website for "Takedown Lawyer" announced: "Due to ethical concerns our business and the website will now be called 'Takedown Hammer'." Uh huh.
There are other little tidbits in this mess, including the fact that the Is Anybody Down site has a blog post asking for investors:
There are, of course, a whole bunch of other legal issues brought up by the site, but the statement above? Yeah, that's a pretty blatant violation of securities law. Publicly advertising for investors is already a no-no, but then also promising an IPO (I'm trying not to laugh) and a return of "upwards of 600%" go way beyond what you're allowed to say.A. Investors, Funding, Etc.
We need more funding (i.e. seed money and/or potential Stage 1 funding) in order to upgrade our server and make T-shirts. Please click the “submit” button to contact an admin if you wish to invest, donate, etc. We are looking for investors, venture capitalists, angel groups, etc.
The seed money will be used for equipment/hardware (computers and server costs), software to be used in the production of the website and the manufacturing of T-shirts which will be sold for value.
Our goal is to raise $50,000+ in seed money to help expand this website, followed by a round one investment prior to an IPO which will return upwards of 600%
Oh yeah, and "Blade" eventually claims that he's going to hit back at Randazza for "extortion," which is interesting since Randazza didn't ask Blade to give him any money (though he does ask him to return the money from those who have paid up to remove their images).
All in all, this certainly feels like yet another one of these "only on the internet" stories where it may be time to get out the popcorn and wait to see what happens next.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: advertising, lawyers, marc randazza, revenge porn
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
He probably just moved on to someone who could put together an actual complete sentence and can communicate above the level of a 3-year-old.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's a nifty idea
DON'T BLOODY TAKE THEM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here's a nifty idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Here's a nifty idea
i think a more tactful way to have put it is this:
in this day & age, if you are not willing to have your nude self plastered all over the internet, you really should think twice about who you are sending those pics to/who you are letting take such pics of you. how much do you trust that person to not let them out? chances are, they are going to be seen by someone that you dont want seeing them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Here's a nifty idea
It's like the other night when I went walking through the slums of New York with $5,000 cash in a bag while singing "I'm in the money!" at the top of my lungs, and I actually got mugged!
What is this world coming to when people have to refrain from doing perfectly legal things just because some others might take advantage of them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here's a nifty idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Here's a nifty idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Here's a nifty idea
The idea is still incredibly slimy and offensive to be sure, but it seems it's largely made possible by a pretty massive dose of lousy judgement on the parts of almost all involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Here's a nifty idea
People will always take cheap shots at ex's, its another thing to try and turn a profit via what smells alot like extortion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Here's a nifty idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm down...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If he wants the CEOs phone number and home address I've already found it. He'll need someone allowed to practice in Colorado.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
These guys are not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
?
Probably? How could it possibly cause a legal issue? "Sure, we'll take down that picture, it will simply cost a $250 processing fee."
Not that I condone this, but it seems like they went out of their way to make this sketchy, a legal sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ?
I am sure his father Retired Master Chief Sargent, United States Air Force would be pleased to know whats being done out of his basement.
The truly sad thing is this moron was actually Doxxed by Anon months ago... and he persists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
2) Get nude photos of people who never consented
3) Post them, along with identifying info
4) receive summons
5) ???
6) Go to jail
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
While it is skeevy when it was happening on the original site, the legal challenges were always getting slapped away because these people gave the pictures to others who then put them on the website.
The cries of many of the female "victims" was they had their pictures "stolen" but no evidence of hacking and it was they sent them to someone they shouldn't have trusted. It just helped them defend their honor to claim they were stolen or hacked... but the point is they took nudes of themselves and not just to keep as memories.
The guy who ran the first site doing this only folded because it stopped being fun for him, but he was more ethical than the idiot running this new version of it... and that bar wasn't that high.
The genius behind this site most likely hasn't verified the ages of any of his victims and well CP charges go over poorly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Even if the victims happen to be over 18, I have known people who worked in porn before, and the recordkeeping requirements with regard to age verification/documentation are incredibly strict. I'm not an expert on the topic, so there may be some legal loophole this person is sneaking through, but my guess would be that he's definitely breaking the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
What I do know is a full doxxing of the person behind the website is on its way via a 3rd party to Randazza.
Its quite possible that will lead him to the "lawyer" and comedy will ensue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
> before, and the recordkeeping requirements
> with regard to age verification/documentation
> are incredibly strict.
There's a legal difference between porn and mere nudity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
That depends on if you have a law degree or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The most frightening thing to come out of all of this is a momentary alliance where I actually helped Randazza.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
but-then there is the copyright/DMCA. Are they complying with the Safe-Harbor restrictions regarding photos? If they can block birds from singing on youtube - then surely someone can file a complaint to get these people offline without the money. And then these sites are sued out.
just like mega-upload.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The people in the pictures don't have much grounds to protest or use other things to get the pics down as they willingly provided them to another party with no strings attached.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Deja vu all over again
Sounds familiar?
It is always fun to watch one extortionist goes after another.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Deja vu all over again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Deja vu all over again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you don't want your picture online then don't take and distribute those pictures to anyone. After you take them they are not private anymore so don't complain. If someone uploads a picture that was taken without consent then that is the uploaders fault for breaking the law, not the sites. You can't keep information a secret once it is made don't know why everyone keeps trying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Simply put, if you don't want nude pictures of yourself to be put on the Internet, don't take nude pictures of yourself. Otherwise, you're taking a gamble.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This days telling the people that they are being stupid and should change their habits in certain things to avoid trouble is seen more and more as "blaming the poor poor victim".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would imagine this case would hinge on details such as consent, the advertising as a lawyer, an attempt to deceive by pretending to not be affiliated and other attempts to deceive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait a minute... I thought they had their own in-house attorney.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Moderation...
Are you new?
Did you really fear I would post the dox here?
I'd really like to understand the motivation.
Many things I'd like to be commenting on now, but there now seems to be no point. My comments just disappearing into the ether.
Might I request the courtesy of an email when this block is lifted and I can once again be trusted to participate as a grownup?
I am disappoint in you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Marc Randazza, Big Porn/Mafia Lawyer
He's turning a profit to bully them - and yet trying really hard to make them look like the bad guys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Everyone of us made many stupid things: before saying "it's nobody's fault but yours," everyone should make an effort and recall own bloopers, and imagine the worst possible consequences.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cease And Desist
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cease And Desist
LOL.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cease And Desist
Privacy rights? Do you REALLY want those enforced?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cease And Desist
If and when unicorns exist, they will ride them to court to file the papers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]