Craigslist Goes On The Offensive: Sues South Carolina's Henry McMaster

from the go-for-it dept

It appears that Craigslist has realized, in responding to all those grandstanding Attorneys General, that it's better to take an offensive position than to continue with its defensive strategy. First, it pointed out how misguided South Carolina's Henry McMaster was in threatening to charge Craigslist's management with criminal prosecution, and then it demanded an apology. With no apology forthcoming, Craigslist has sued Henry McMaster seeking declaratory relief that its actions do not violate the law. McMaster has continued to push forward with his plans to file a lawsuit, claiming that Craigslist CEO Jim Buckmaster is "the #1 defendant." Craigslist, in response, points out that Craigslist:

• is operating in full compliance with all applicable laws
• has earned a reputation for being unusually responsive to requests from law enforcement
• has eliminated its "erotic services" category for all US cities
• has adopted screening measures far stricter than those Mr McMaster himself personally endorsed with his signature just 6 months ago
• has far fewer and far tamer adult service ads than many mainstream print and online venues operating in South Carolina
• has made its representatives available to hear Mr McMaster's concerns in person
• has politely asked Mr McMaster to retract and apologize for his unreasonable threats

So, in response, Craigslist has filed its lawsuit to have a court declare that the company is not violating any laws, and that McMaster has no case. This is a good move, and you would have hoped it would quiet down McMaster, but he's actually (no, seriously) using this to claim victory. In a statement on his website McMaster claims:

The defensive legal action craigslist has taken against the solicitors and my office is good news. It shows that craigslist is taking the matter seriously for the first time.... Unfortunately, we had to inform them of possible state criminal violations concerning their past practices to produce a serious response. We trust they will now adhere to the higher standards they have promised. This office and the law enforcement agencies of South Carolina will continue to monitor the site to make certain that our laws are respected.

That's just blatant outright lying now. Craigslist made those changes last week, and at the time McMaster's response was: "That response doesn't work" and claimed it was proceeding with plans to punish Craigslist management with jail time. Since then, Craigslist has made no other change, other than to sue McMaster. To suddenly claim that it's made a new change and is taking the matter seriously, when the only change is suing McMaster, is quite the delusional response. I have no idea how likely it is that McMaster will win his current race for the Governor's spot in South Carolina -- but so far the man has been an embarrassment to the state.

30 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Looks Like Henry McMaster Is Upset About His Lost Craigslist Photo Op As Well

from the oh-come-on... dept

Yesterday, Craigslist caved in to the demands of various state Attorneys General, and agreed to pre-moderate all of the "adult" ads that go on their site. This appeared to be exactly what many grandstanding AGs had been asking for... but it appears that more than a few of them were upset that Craigslist did this without granting the AGs a chance to take credit for it. First, we had NY AG Andrew Cuomo's petulent statement about how Craigslist never should have done this without first getting approval from Andrew Cuomo, and now the EFF points out a similar complaint from South Carolina AG Henry McMaster, who says that he's going to continue his plan to throw Craigslist management in jail unless they remove all sexually explicit material from the site.

It's difficult to know where to start on this, but McMaster's understanding of the law doesn't seem to have anything to do with the actual law. First off, plenty of sexually explicit material is not illegal. Second, even if the material is somehow illegal, the liability is on those who posted it, not Craigslist.

Oh yeah. It's probably worth noting that a similarity between both Cuomo and McMaster? Both are apparently (definitely in McMaster's case) seeking their respective state's governorship... You would think that abusing a high-level gov't position for grandstanding and censorship would disqualify one from getting to run a state, but apparently not.

21 Comments | Leave a Comment..

What Happens If A Social-Networking Exec Becomes Attorney General?

from the does-not-compute dept

Lots of state attorneys general around the country have been taking shots at sites like Craigslist, MySpace and Facebook. They're generally pretty misguided, and seem to really have more to do with politcal opportunism than anything else. Many of these diatribes are based on a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of the internet and social-networking sites, so maybe we should welcome the news that a senior Facebook exec is thinking about running for AG in California. There's a lot more than internet issues to the AG's job, but hopefully if the exec, Chris Kelly, got elected, he could inject some intelligence into the other state AGs' moral panics over online activity -- though given the way they react to disagreement, that's probably just wishful thinking.

Carlo Longino is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Carlo Longino and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

5 Comments | Leave a Comment..

As Expected, Prostitutes Move Elsewhere After Craigslist Change

from the good-job-doing-nothing dept

We pointed out how little sense it made for various state attorneys general to force Craigslist to charge for the "erotic services" group. It would appear that at least 40 states' attorneys general are not chess players, because they only were thinking one move out. That is, they thought: "Well, there's prostitution happening via Craigslist. Let's stop Craigslist from allowing that." But, of course, they didn't bother to think of what would happen next: which is that the prostitutes would scatter to numerous other sites, meaning that the amount of prostitution would continue pretty much unabated, but it would be more scattered and much more difficult for police to track down and stop. You would think that the folks in charge of such things would recognize that the way you stop crime is by going after the actual criminals, rather than the tools they use.

So, what happened after Craigslist implemented the change? Exactly what you'd expect. Ed Kohler checked it out and noticed (as you'd expect) that the number of ads on Craigslist's erotic services dropped significantly, but the number of ads elsewhere jumped up somewhat (including some on Craigslist's "Therapeutic Services" -- suggesting that some are trying to skirt the new charging system). Kohler only looked at one other site, so it may look like the increase in ads isn't that big -- but if you add up a variety of similar sites, you can bet that it's quite likely that in total it added up to quite a lot. It's just that, now, it's a lot more work for police to actually monitor.

32 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Andrew Cuomo Threatens To Sue Comcast If It Doesn't Sign Up For His Plan To Pretend To Fight Child Porn

from the grandstanding dept

Last month, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo made some news by pressuring a bunch of ISPs to agree to block certain sites in a totally misguided effort to fight child porn. It will actually do the opposite, because it merely hides the issue, driving it further underground, rather than attacking at the source. At the same time, it opens up a very questionable door: having ISPs blocking any content that they feel is "objectionable" in some manner. It's not hard to predict where this goes, in terms of ISPs blocking other types of content as well.

Comcast was one of the companies that agreed last week to a similar proposal with a bunch of state attorneys general, but apparently that's not enough for Andrew Cuomo. He's now threatening to sue Comcast within five days if it doesn't sign the more stringent "code of conduct" that Cuomo wrote up. Apparently Cuomo doesn't think last week's agreement goes far enough.

Of course, what's odd is that nowhere does Cuomo explain how Comcast's actions violate the law. He just threatens to sue over it -- and even makes a veiled threat that the lawsuit alone will be damaging to Comcast, because Cuomo will position it as Comcast protecting child porn:

Comcast's unwillingness to sign the code of conduct and purge its system of child pornography puts Comcast at the back of the pack in the race to fight this scourge, and would likely be surprising to Comcast's millions of customers across the country.

The reason Cuomo doesn't explain what the legal rationale for any lawsuit, is because there isn't one. Comcast as a connectivity provider is not responsible for what content goes across its network. Cuomo (one would hope) knows this -- and is bullying Comcast into signing his "Code of Conduct" by threatening to paint the company as protecting child porn. That's a rather sickening abuse of power -- and the end result will only be to make it more difficult to stop child pornography, while opening the door to widespread content blocking by ISPs.

48 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Why ISP's 'Stand' Against Child Porn Is Actually Not A Stand Against Child Porn

from the let's-try-this-again,-shall-we? dept

Following NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's success in getting ISPs to turn off Usenet access and pretend it was a victory against child porn, a bunch of cable providers under the umbrella of the NCTA have announced an agreement with 45 attorneys general, claiming that they, too, are taking a "stand against child porn." This "stand" is the same as what Cuomo pressured ISPs to do: officially it's to block any newsgroup or website that is "known to host child pornography." Taking a stand against child pornography would be a good thing -- but this is not actually a stand against child pornography. This is trying to sweep a problem under the rug so that some politicians and some companies can get some good headlines.

Taking a stand against child porn wouldn't be overly aggressively blocking access to internet destinations that may or may not have porn (and there's no review over the list to make sure that they're actually objectionable). Taking a stand against child porn would be hunting down those responsible for the child porn and making sure that they're dealt with appropriately. Blocking access to some websites doesn't solve the problem. Those who still produce and make use of child porn will still get it from other sources -- but it will be more underground, making it more difficult for authorities to track down. Also, this sets an awful precedent in that the ISPs can point out that it's ok for them to block "objectionable" content where they get to define what's objectionable without any review. For those folks who support network neutrality, this is highly questionable, because it's clearly going against the basic principles of network neutrality -- but in a way no one will protest because they don't want to be seen as siding with child pornographers. But the truth is this "stand" against child pornography won't do anything to stop child pornographers other than making them harder to track down -- and it sends these ISPs down the slippery slope of getting to decide what they think is objectionable content that should be blocked.

53 Comments | Leave a Comment..