Canadian model Liskula Cohen is demanding Google reveal the identity of the Blogger.com user whose Skanks in NYC blog is entirely dedicated to calling her a "skank", an "old hag" and other flattering descriptions. Grab of blog describing Liskula Cohen as Mr. Ed's wife Mrs. Ed According to the New York Daily News, 36-year-old …
You can't - at least in the UK - sue someone for libel simply for calling you names. Unless this person makes unfounded claims Google doesn't have to do anything.
And because of this publicity the blog is now going to get many more visitors.
That quote in full
"This is libelous, it's defamatory and you shouldn't just get away with this."
And by responding in this fashion we have elevated our client from an obscure Canadian model to a world wide brand hence increasing our cut of the damages we can now expect.
It's a good thing that we got rid of that pesky old free speech thing.
Now the mentally handicapped such as politicians, musicians, an models can sue everyone.
Given the caption to the photo at the top of the item, isn't the term 'clotheshorsing' a little unfortunate, or does it imply the opinion of the writer on the case?
"Still going to clubs at her age"
that's right! After you hit 24 you should never set foot in a club again and should sit at home, alone, getting drunk by yourself or with the partner you should have by then- and if not, you're clearly a skank and a failure in life.
What a twat that blogger sounds.
Cohen should lose his license to practice law
You Brits might be able to call this libel, but here in The States, the court doctrines on libel specifically exclude criticisms of professional performances. She's a model, the photos are professional performances, therefore while the anonymous poster may be a cretin, he or she is protected by US law, and Cohen shouldn't be wasting public resources on such idiocy.
What happened to freedom of speech?
One can tell it's invective and not claims that she is *actually* a whore.
Hmmm. Well if she wins the El Reg had better watch out - you've displayed some downright nasty comments about the lovely, chaste young Paris.
After looking at the linked article; it's a tragedy! What did she used to look like?
"...as well as clotheshorsing..."
You might be next on the libel hitlist for making uncomplimentary equine comparisons!
Seriously, the lady should either suck it up or fade into the background ... for as long as there have been celebrities there have been people talking smack about them - the internet just makes it easier and faster to do so and allows them to express their displeasure to a MUCH wider uncaring audience.
If I were her, I'd just laugh off the entire matter as some no-life troll with a computer and an internet connection and get on with life.
shes a model, a public figure, she would not be suing if said blogger had called her a beauty.....
from used picture shown she looks nothing special to me, she should just give up.
if blogger had aimed comments at mrs school run mum, then i would suggest a case did exist, but when you parade your body for money, like a work of art, you have to accept the critics.
A mature person would simply dismiss the remarks as "jealous" and move on.
Indeed she makes reference to not having the time to deal with every person that throws an insult or two her way, so why is she pursuing this rediculous case?
The remarks are the viewpoint of one individual, I'm sure there are many thousands, tens of thousands of people that like her and have made positive remarks about her in the media.
I suppose it's an opportunity for the Jewish lady to make money out of suing someone.
Think she needs to get a life and stop worrying about the petty non-important issues in life.
Correct me if I'm wrong, if she's suing for deformation she will have to prove that said comments will have to have had a negative impact on her. Gonna be hard to prove that, when almost certainly they haven't.
Just too funny.
The old saying is:
"If it is not true, then everyone will know it, and if it is true..."
And considering she's probably as desirable as a plastic store dummy, perhaps it is true?
I don't get how she can Sue? If somebody said this about me on a blog i'm sure I wouldn't be able to sue them?
@anon coward 14:52GMT
Jewish lady? Is there a reason you mention that? Is it because she's out for money?
If that is your intended meaning, then I wish you'd use something other than A C, so I could identify you and avoid you here.
what the heck
I think she is suing Google for the name of the person who hurt her feelings / reputation and then will have her goons do a little tap dance on that person. Frankly it's just a likely this is all a tempest in a teapot to get publicity as if you search even Google images; there were only 77 hits. For a "famous model"; you would expect to find more.
Since she has apparently found employment in relative obscurity I can't understand why she would be opening up this can of worms.
Anyone can sue, doesn't mean there's any chance of winning...
And the point of the Jewish comment is what exactly?
Sad b**ch - 'I suppose it's an opportunity for the Jewish lady to make money out of suing someone' -
Care to explain why the Jewish comment is particulalrly relevant? Oh yeah its not - grow up.
@ free speech retards
Once again: "free" speech has consequences. How hard is it to understand?
Now, I don't know if she has a chance of winning this. Wouldn't harassment be a more appropriate term? I think there are laws against that. Maybe not. I mean, some idiot insulting you here and there, whatever. But a blog dedicated exclusively to do that to someone on a regular basis (that's what the article said, at least) sure is a different matter, no? IANAL, so maybe not.
You are free to say whatever you want, but you're also responsible for the consequences. If the consequences are something that can be sued over, that's a different question, of course.
remember, in the USA you can sue for anything and rarely have to pay anyhting but your own lawyer, who will often work for a percentage of the settlement, if any....
that's why there is a CRIMINAL CHARGE for malicious lawsuiting in the US, the suER doesn't have to pay the court costs of the suEE
Paris 'cause suEE sounds like "squeal like a pig"
Re: And the point of the Jewish comment is what exactly?
Oh yes, that one got by me. Well done, asshat. Now I'm watching you.
Incidentally, regardless of the merits of the legal case here, it might be nice if people remember that she's been physically and career-endingly scarred by a senseless attack and could do without some smug internet tit taking the piss out of her.
if she has such a problem with it
she should stop looking at the blog. this case will not hold up in court. there are no threats made against her in this blog. someone is simply offering their opinion about her. she has not been harrassed in any way. she should be thanking this person for the exposure.
@sarah bee: the fact that she has been "physically and career-endingly scarred" in a completely unrelated incident has nothing to do with this, and she should be afforded NO special treatment in light of it. i'm glad more people don't operate under such flawed logic... we would have mentally retarded people as CEO's just because people felt bad for them. too bad, she can't model anymore. and if her career was in fact ruined by that, why is she still referring to herself as a model?
and i have to admit, she does indeed have some horse-face action going on.
You're all heart...
Maybe she wants to know who is publishing nasty shit about her because this sort of thing is sometimes the first sign of a stalker. Also, how do you know that the career ending scarring isn't anything to do with the blog entries?
I bet it's her doing it
Just for some twisted reason that will make a TV miniseries and a direct to DVD movie, possibly a novelisation if she plays it right.
Cunning plan.... BRB off to Blogger to start calling myself names.
Said blogger did not critique her performance or her photo, he (she?) attacked the person directly (assuming the extract from the blog is correct).
As far as I am concerned, this person has no "moral high-ground" to hide behind: it was a personal attack, not a professional critique.
"we would have mentally retarded people as CEO's just because people felt bad for them"
Tyler, have you taken a look at the world economy recently?
She needs to know who posted the comments so she can hit them with her cell phone.
Arbitration, not law courts?
This poor woman had her life ruined by some animal in a bar. An animal, by the way, who recently repeated his "outburst".
For those of you who think this lady "doesn't look that special" maybe you'd like to consider how you'd feel if this was your friend, your sister, your daughter or your girlfriend. Whatever we might feel about the "value" of a modelling career, she is a human being.
Her entire career was based on how she looks, and she lost it in a second. As somebody who would never make a career from my looks the nearest comparision I could make is if that stupid git of a doorman had whacked me on the head and left me brain damaged.
Is a legal challenge the right way to deal with this? Well, personally I think it's overkill. But what other response does she have? Free speech is one thing, but when that argument is used to justify everything from ignorant insults through to right wing neo-nazism, maybe there ought to be a way to ask blog sites to just take the offensive content down.
The problem is, of course, who decides what is offensive? In this case I think it's clear cut. this entire blog is a callous tirade against an innocent individual. It has no value. Take it down.
The blog in question has a grand total of 5 posts on it, the last one written four months ago, and would no doubt have languished in well-deserved obscurity without Ms Cohen splashing it round the papers.
It's a lesson for her NOT to go ego-surfing through google for every mention of her name - not everything you find is going to please you.
Balls. I bet you google yourself frequently. Besides, I suspect someone might have told her about it.
Ooh look, the weekend!