Bloke, 27, cuffed, charged over stolen selfie smut site UGotPosted

Re: If

Why are you blaming the victim AC?

If it was your pictures up there of you in the buff, along with your personal contact information would you still have the same attitude? Do you think that the site owner was right to charge extortionate amounts of money to maybe take them down?

Re: If

And why assume the victims agreed to have the photos taken? I'm sure some did, but there's been plenty of news lately of bastards using hidden cameras and hacking webcams to get compromising photos without the target's knowledge.

But, regardless, if you really think you've got a good point, why post anonymously? Worried we might see who's responsible for such top-notch ethical reasoning?

Re: If

NIce Black and White world you live in there. Sadly, the one the rest of us inhabit is actually different shades.

People in relationships will always take these kinds of photographs. They have been doing so for a long time. Admittedly, it would have been a little difficult to take a photo when you are in action when photography was new and you had to stay in the same position for 15 minutes to get a clear photo, but I suspect people found a way around that too.

Photos are, in a way, memories. It's reasonable to assume that a couple might want to have reminders of some of their more passionate times.

Regardless of the reason the photos were taken, IMO, the people begin photographed have a right to determine who is going to see it. If they want photos of them dangling from the light fitting over a dildo the size of a man's leg to be published, they have that right. Similarly if they want to take a photo of themselves naked for their other half and just want him or her to see it, they have the right to decide that as well.

I had a work colleague. He was going out with an absolutely stunning woman who worked in another department in the same company as both of us. His actions when they broke up? To set up a website (he ran his own web hosting firm part time, so had a free server he could use) containing photos of said stunning woman in various poses, but usually with her legs around her neck and wearing only a rather weird looking jumper. He then emailed the link to every man he worked with.

I'll be honest, I never realised the impact this sort of thing would have until I saw her the next day. She had previously been a very confident woman, but that confidence had left her. She actually looked visibly deflated and very embarrassed. It took weeks for her to recover her confidence.

He did get his though. One of my other colleagues also saw the photos. She noticed that a lot of the website bore a striking resemblance to the website Sony were using to provide support for their Viao laptops. A couple of phone calls and a few days later, he got a Cease and Desist order from Sony's Lawyers and was bricking himself.

Re: I wonder about the charges

quote: "Free Speech doesn't extend to extortion and blackmail."

But it apparently does extend to putting incriminating photos of people in the public eye without the subjects permission and charging for the privilege, see tabloid newspapers and any (female) celeb who has sunbathed topless, including Kate Windsor (née Middleton).

I'm fine with him doing time for the extortion and blackmail, but charging him with a "crime" committed by tabloid newspapers the world over is a little galling. Simply hosting them and profiting from advertising revenue is functionally so similar to printing them and charging a modest fee for the newspaper, that I'd aquit him of that one charge were I on the jury.

I'm not saying it is right, I am saying that if we all agree it is wrong then we need to ensure that the media are charged and prosecuted for it. Like tax avoidance, if something is perfectly legal then you lose the right to complain about someone doing it, you need to campaign to get the law changed to make it illegal ;)

Saville row

You could use the same argument for running a paedo site. "He's only providing a service. If there wasn't a demand for pictures of naked kids he wouldn't make any money"

Wrong in so many ways. I can't tell if this is just misogyny or outpouring from an array of unrealised sociopaths. I'm serious - go see a psychiatrist of you can't understand why this website was so utterly denigrating and devastating to it's victims.

Sigh... You can make that argument about any crime that someone chooses to pay for.

Want someone beaten up? There's a guy at this pub I know, but it's ok because you're paying him and he wouldn't do it, if there wasn't demand for it.

Oh and nothing like yoghurt, because that's a foodstuff, we need foodstuffs to live, it's also a way of preserving milk and has historically been fairly essential to life in north Africa.

"He's just providing a service, if there wasn't demand for it he wouldn't make money out of it would he?"

Now try extending that logic to hitmen and seeing if it sounds like a valid defence.

"He's just providing a service"

I cannot begin to get my head around this comment. Seriously? He was publishing naked photos of people without their permission, then contacting them and offering to provide the service of not also publishing their name, address, and phone number?

I provided you with the service of not burning your house down yesterday. First one was a freebie, but give me a grand and I'll do it again. What a bargain: having your house not burnt down twice!

Re: Nasty Blackmail @M7S

I know it sounds harsh but so is life.

If you went surfing around the internet using a windows machine without updating Java ,flash etc and had no antivirus then just about every commentard on The Reg would call you foolish and reckless. As for a burgler getting into your garage then you need to think do I have good enough locks and maybe I should put a PIR in there and connect it up to the alarm. In a ideal world there are no bad people but unfortunately life isn't like that and you learn as you get older to avoid exposure to risk. It's still a jungle out there, just a human one.

Re: Nasty Blackmail @ rm -rf/

"That's a bit harsh. People take photos. People expect privacy, possibly based on what IT companies tell them. "

Yes it's harsh, but privacy on the net is a lie. That genie has long escape the bottle and no matter how much we try to shove it back in the bottle (I'm one of the people trying), it will never fully return.

The Internet MUST be treated as hostile to privacy - but we the same time shitbags like this need to be stomped into a bloody jelly on the sidewalk, or the problem will get much _much_ worse.

I'm not trying to blame victims here. People do stupid things all the time and mostly don't deserve to have their faces rubbed in it. What the blackmail victims are mostly guilty of, is falling for the lies peddled by outfits like Facebook, etc that they _do_ have privacy, should they entrust their data to any third party.

"We" really need ot make sure that people are aware that there's no such thing as privacy on the net, despite what hudnreds of companies say - and that people should be aware that most of those companies have a vested interest in breaching your provacy without you being aware of it, if only to sell you targetted advertising.

Re: Nasty Blackmail @ Squander Two

Don't want to get mugged - don't go waving an iphone about in in downtown Jo'berg at 3.00am

Don't want to get burgled - don't go on holiday with all your windows and doors left open.

Don't want to be a victim of fraud - If it sounds too good to be true then it is.

Don't want to get run over - look the both ways when you cross the road.

Don't want to get lung cancer - don't smoke

Don't want to die from a drugs overdose - don't do drugs

Don't want to end up front page News of The World - don't go to spanking parlours

Don't want to appear all over the internet naked - then don't listen to your first or second boyfriend who tells you a lot of crap about how great you look and how he would like some naked photos of you on his phone. He then promptly goes round showing them to all his mates in the pub and when you dump him for his best mate, it's whoopsy daisy.

Shit happens - you spend your entire life trying to dodge the bullet hoping it's not going to happen to you. It's called risk reduction.

I have a ten year old daughter and I make damn sure she knows about stranger danger, bad men and how to cross the road properly.