[karajorma]

Apparently one of the biggest revenge porn website operators doesn't like it when people post his picture without permission. My heart bleeds.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/02/revenge-porn-boss-wants-google-to-remove-his-identity-related-info/

Revenge porn boss wants Google to remove his “identity related” info
Craig Brittain wants links to stories of FTC dinging his site wiped from search.

What do you do if you're a revenge porn site operator and the Federal Trade Commission has barred you from publishing nude images of people without their consent?

You demand that Google remove from its search engine links to news accounts about the FTC's action and other related stories, citing "unauthorized use of photos of me and other related information."

Craig Brittain—the former operator of revenge porn site IsAnybodyDown.com—is invoking the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in a bid to remove 23 links in all—an irony-filled DMCA takedown request that Google is ignoring. One of the links renders the FTC's press release in January about its enforcement against Brittain. Another is a link to Ars' story about the FTC's move: "Sleazy 'revenge porn' site is banished to settle federal charges."

In addition to claims that the links contain "unauthorized" information about him, Brittain asserts "unauthorized use of statements and identity related information. Unauthorized copying of excerpts from isanybodydown.com. Using photos which are not 'fair use.'"

The DMCA requires Internet companies like Google to remove links to infringing content at a rights holder's request or face legal liability. In this instance, fair use and general First Amendment principles are on Google's and the media's side.

Brittain's takedown requests likely wouldn't even qualify for removal in Europe under the "right to be forgotten" ruling from the European High court in May. The decision requires search engines to take down "inadequate, irrelevant, or no longer relevant” materials from search results upon request by EU citizens.

The FTC complaint against Brittain alleged that "he used deception to acquire and post intimate images of women, then referred them to another website he controlled, where they were told they could have the pictures removed if they paid hundreds of dollars."

Brittain did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

I might be able to find some sympathy for him.... if I could stop laughing. I also love that Ars just simply published his photo again in the article.

[Bobboau]

if only a video of him engaged in a less than flattering sexual activity had surfaced on the internet the irony would be complete.

[headdie]

if only a video of him engaged in a less than flattering sexual activity had surfaced on the internet the irony would be complete.

Very true, but this is a lol worthy substitute until that time happens

[karajorma]

It needs to be something that only involves him, so that we have video proof that he's a wanker.

[Luis Dias]

Are you suggesting there are males out there who aren't wankers? Who are these weird strange people whom you are referring to?



Regarding the wanker in question, I can see his point, he's pretty much making a temper tantrum a 4 year old does when he's forbidden to do something, he'll be all judgemental about any single thing his brothers will have done at that point "but he's doing that thing too!". Doesn't surprise me in the least this idiot has no self-awareness of what he's doing. Had he any, he wouldn't have built this abhorrent business to begin with.

[karajorma]

I'm simply suggesting that no woman, man or animal should have to live with the shame of appearing in amateur porn with this guy.

[headdie]

somehow I dont think it will be an issue lol