We all seem concerned with protecting our privacy from governments and corporations, but what about malicious individuals?
In September 2006, Jason Fortuny, a 30 something Seattle-area graphic designer posted a fake-ad on Craig’s list (a large “community classifieds” website that posts numerous personal ads). Fortuny pretended to be a woman into serious S&M seeking a man to dominate her and inflict pain. He posted the 178 responses, in full, including identifying photographs and personal contact details on his website, claiming that anyone who would engage in such behaviour deserves to be exposed.
The stunt was publicized and later duplicated, by Michael Crook who went as far as to contact some of the respondents.
http://www.10zenmonkeys.com/2006/09/18/in-the-company-of-jerkoffs/
Dan Savage, the syndicated sex-columnist, who supports individuals exploring their sexual fetishes and fantasies (as long as they pertain to consenting adults) condemned Fortuny for causing the most harm to the most honest individuals who were merely playing by the rules of online dating.
Adding to the debate law professor Jonathan Zittrain argued that, “The men who replied to Fortuny’s posting did not appear to be doing anything illegal, so the outing has no social value other than to prove that someone could ruin lives online.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Zittrai
At the same time, some argue that individuals need to take some level of responsibility for personal information they voluntarily post on the internet.
Although there was some attention given to the issue in alternative media, the mainstream largely ignored the issue. Would our reaction be the same if he had ousted homosexuals in red state America? Would we feel the same if he was exploiting the privacy of teenaged girls?
Questions:
Do you think that Jason Fortuny should be criminally charged for his actions? If so what would be a fair punishment?
Do you think that all 178 respondents should be able to file a class action (law suit) again Fortuny? If so on what grounds?
Do the individual “victims” lose their right to legal action because they willingly supplied their personal details online?
Suggested Readings :
Wikipedia Internet Privacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_privacy#Jason_Fortuny_and_Craigslist
Dan Savage’s Original Column:
This month we’re opening up the vault and talking about SEX & POLITICS. One of the more prominent sex scandals in Canada involves Dr. Keon (prominent politician and former heart surgeon in Ottawa). No outside reading is required for this event. All you need to know are the following key facts.
The Issue:
• Wilbert Joseph Keon, is a heart surgeon, researcher and a member of the Senator of Canada. Born in Sheenboro, Quebec, he received a Bachelor of Science from St. Patrick’s College, Carleton University and a Doctor of Medicine from the University of Ottawa.
• After a period of studying and teaching at Harvard University in Boston, he returned to Ottawa in the early 1970s, where he founded the University of Ottawa Heart Institute at the Ottawa Civic Hospital and acted as its CEO for more than thirty years until his retirement in 2004.
• In 1986 he was the first Canadian to implant an artificial heart into a human as a bridge to transplant.
• In 1990 he was appointed to the Senate by Brian Mulroney where he sits as a Conservative. In 1960 he married Anne Jennings. They have three children: Claudia, Ryan and Neil. They are still married today.
• In the 1990s Wilbert Keon was arrested for soliciting a woman for prostitution, as part of a police sting. He participated in a program, and was never charged or convicted with any offence stemming from the incident. He offered to remove himself from his position on the board at the “Heart Institute” but he did not offer to remove himself from being a “Senator”.
• After the initial arrest, Doctor Keon was of course publicly humiliated and subsequently apologized for his actions. Although the issue was hotly debated in newsrooms and daily newspapers, a good majority of Ottawa citizens were upset that Doctor Keon had even been arrested given the important work he had done in the community and felt that he should have only received a warning for his actions.
Question:
Given the preceding events should a well respected community leader such as Doctor Keon be subjected to a lighter punishment given the relatively minor crime he was involved in?
