Shockingly Craigslist Account Soliciting Naked Photos For Revenge Porn Has Same IP As Site Owner And Fake Lawyer
from the shockers dept
It's been a little while since we last wrote about the "revenge porn" website IsAnybodyDown which has gone from questionable (and possibly illegal) practice to questionable (and possibly illegal) practice. You may recall that the site first came to our attention when an "advertisement" on the site claimed to be from a lawyer who would get the naked images on the site taken down for a small fee. The problem? Well, the "lawyer David Blade" did not appear to exist. And his emails came from the same IP address as the site's owner (and, no, IP addresses alone do not guarantee they're the same person, but it raises questions). Since then, the guys behind the site, Chance Trahan and Craig Brittain, have made crazy claim after crazy claim often with little basis in reality. There was the attempt to silence criticism via bogus DMCA notices, followed by bogus legal threats.Back in November, Adam Steinbaugh noted that it appeared that many of the images were sent via tricking people on Craigslist into sending naked pictures, which Brittain seems to believe is the equivalent of permission to post the images. At one point, Brittain posted some emails that showed some of the Craigslist communications came via his own email address. Oops.
It appears that more and more people are becoming aware of this, and realizing that if Brittain is soliciting these images, often by lying to unsuspecting individuals, the legal issues he may be facing are increasing drastically. A reporter in Denver, Brian Maass has spoken with a woman whose images appeared on the site, and the email exchange... came from the same IP address as Brittain and the non-lawyer "David Blade."
Late Friday, CBS4 broadcast Maass' interview with a woman who met another woman on Craigslist named "Jess Davis." Davis corresponded and sent nude photos of herself, and she asked the other woman to send her racy photos in return. Davis also asked for her date of birth and phone number, saying she was looking to have "just some fun." The victim went along with the exchange, believing she was interacting with a woman.Given Steinbaugh's earlier reporting on this, this is hardly surprising, but it raises the legal problems Brittain may come up against at some point.
Five days later, the woman's photos were on IsAnybodyDown, along with her contact info. "This is something I didn't want all of the world to see," she told Maass in the interview, in which her face and voice were obscured.
Turns out, the e-mails from jessdavis877@gmail.com came from the same IP address as Craig Brittain's e-mails—just like e-mails from the "Takedown Lawyer" named "David Blade III," which also apparently originated at Brittain's Colorado Springs home.
If Brittain created fake identities to acquire womens' photos and then posted them online himself, it's pretty clear that he won't be protected by the federal law that he believes shields him currently, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. That law protects website owners from liability for material posted by their users in certain situations. An attorney who speaks with Maass in the new piece says that by creating fake identities to populate his site with new photos, Brittain's behavior enters the criminal realm.The Ars Technica report (linked above) that covers the latest Brittain interview also includes a bunch of ridiculous quotes and claims from Brittain, who seems to think he can say just about anything without consequence, such as insisting that the people appearing on his site want to be there.
"You're saying, all those people want to be on your website?" asks Maass.That's quite a stretch of course. But Brittain then goes even further, suggesting that this is all for the greater good. Yes, putting up naked photos of people that they may have taken willingly, but for a very specific audience, is good for society:
"I would say so," answers Brittain. "I would suggest they want people to see their pictures... What they don't want is some of the shame, some of the discrimination from people. I would suggest they took the pictures, they obviously want people to see them. They sent a lot of them to random strangers that they had never met."
"We actually think the fact they're taking these pictures is a good thing, and an acceptable thing," he says. "We're not trying to shame them or scrutinize them. We're trying to entertain the world. And also to take away a lot of the stigma that's associated with this, because we don't believe these people should be shamed. It may be tough for some of the first people that have been posted. But as time goes on and this gets bigger, this will become more and more of an acceptable thing in society."That's one way to look at it, though I find it difficult to believe that posting naked images of someone publicly, who had no such intention for those pictures, is unlikely to become a "socially acceptable" kind of thing any time soon.
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: craig brittain, is anybody down, revenge porn, solicitation
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
4chan
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4chan
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...Prenda?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wonder what would happen if someone posted his naked person on a website and offered him to remove it for a fee, while saying it was "for his own good".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Heroin Chic did so much damage to the world...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I never had an issue with the site existing, up until there was the fake lawyer portion to get the images down. Extortion is not nice.
Sometimes people need object lessons, take for example they wrecked cars that make the rounds at our high schools. This is what actually happened to someone who was drinking and driving. This is what happened to someone who just had to answer that text. No matter how many times you tell them, they assume they are in the magical few who can avoid all of the bad.
This is what can happen when you send out random nudes to people. Had the site not given out phone numbers, email addys, FB profiles etc and actually took down the pics when people asked... it would not have not raised a blip.
But well they wanted easy money, and did every skeezy thing they could to get it. Some of the pictures might be CP, and I am sure that Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber are trying to scrub their machines clean now before the authorities roll in.
From reading over on Ars it looks like the site finally folded, and they are trying to sell off the domain. I doubt it'll be enough to get them out on bond.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I was saddened by his criminal record, I really thought he deserved much more than he got.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wordfence has limited your access to this site
Your access to this service has been temporarily limited. Please try again in a few minutes. (HTTP response code 503)
Reason: Exceeded the maximum global requests per minute for crawlers or humans.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The one thing I have against the assault they will endure is something I read about Mark Randazza wanting to go after them using copyright laws, that would be bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
CP violations dwarf copyright violations.
And I believe I read somewhere that Randazza did have a client, who was just waiting for the registrations to come back.
Althou I guess if copyright can get you a SWAT team in copters to raid a mansion...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Feb 19th, 2013 @ 11:59pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In principle it's a great idea to outlaw revenge porn because it's a dick move and people do not deserve to be posted all over the internet sucking dick.
In fact it's a horrible idea because it will be abused for a method of revenge.
Breakups are far too emotional for such a law to ever work. I see a few sites trying to pass laws to ban it but even though they mean for the best it would never turn out how they think.
Not when people are out for blood..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Putting him in a ring with some of his victims would also be trying to entertain the world. Tying his hand behind his back first would add to the fun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Noone can see the picture I'm giving a stranger
This is why you meet someone, get to know them, date them a little THEN send your pictures. She had this coming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]