the mother of all link baits?


Or is this a suicidal nut?

[Jason Fortuny] took the text and photo from a sexually explicit ad (warning: not safe for work) in another area, reposted it to Craigslist Seattle, and waited for the responses to roll in. Like Simon's experiment, the response was immediate. He wrote, "178 responses, with 145 photos of men in various states of undress. Responses include full e-mail addresses (both personal and business addresses), names, and in some cases IM screen names and telephone numbers."

In a staggering move, he then published every single response, unedited and uncensored, with all photos and personal information to Encyclopedia Dramatica (kinda like Wikipedia for web fads and Internet drama). Read the responses (warning: sexually explicit material).

Some of the links have very X rated pics so be careful if you are at work.

So, is this real or the mother of all link bait?


or the mother of all lawsuits?

I'm no big city lawyer, but aren't emails copywritten the moment you send them?


I'm no lawyer either but I'm under the impression publishing someone's email was a no-no.

While there has been some

While there has been some discussion in other places about the legality of publishing an email the law may not look very kindly on someone who has used false pretences(that's the Australian legal term) to gain the information they received in that email.

Maybe it is the Sicilian in me

..but I would think legal action would be the least of his worries.

Sicilian For You

Redneck for me...

You'uns jess wanted to fuck with people? I don't even know ya son but I know ya ain't got no upjerkins...

Sue ya? Nah, it's sooo-eeee, to feed ya to the hogs...

The copyright violation starts off

with that picture he posted initially, assuming that he didn't get formal permission to publish it. (Fat chance, heh.) Of course, the rights holder would actually have to sue him explicitly for anything to come of that.

Anyway, looks like a case that'll probably be pretty hard to defend in court. The damages claims alone could prove to be quite staggering.

that blog is worth reading

First I have to say I love the title of this post littleman :)

But I went and read the post, he's closed comments on it now, and I'm about halfway through them, going back for the rest now. The story has many sides, our immediate responses here - sympathy, contempt, revenge, etc - have all been expressed in the discussion tailing the post.

One big point not mentioned here yet is how easy it would be to trash somebody's rep by spoofing their info in a reply to one of these outing ploys - and yes there are more happening already it seems.

Well, the good folks over at

aren't boasting 3+ million members for nothing:

Total Members: 3,102,900
New Today: 1,893
New Posts Today: 968
Gallery Entries Today: 60

Exhibitionism + voyeurism are on the loose almost everywhere these days.

But at least AWC seem to have their privacy act together.

And yes, I cordially agree that a Sicilian Bowtie might seem quite adequate a piece of garment in this case ...

Ehm, for the unaware: :)

It's a sick world !!! Thank

It's a sick world !!!

Thank god.

I don't get it

Why did he do that?

Everyone knows what dogs men are.

Rather a lot of 'reputation

Rather a lot of 'reputation management' SEO work there up for grabs then...

He's in trouble...

First, it can be argued that the e-mail exchange had an expectation of privacy. This is akin to inviting a house guest over and using a hidden camera on them while they take a shower. The expectation of the e-mail sender is that the e-mail was being sent to who they said they were and that the contents would remain private.

Second, this would make him responsible for any and all damages to the individual. This includes loss of job and any emotional distress caused to marriages, relationships, friendships, and other social consequences the publication of the e-mails would cause.

Finally, he had no right to publish the images. Not only are the images not his property, but the e-mailer should be given that expectation of privacy. But the biggest issue he could fall into is the fact that posting nude images online without proper 2257 documentation is illegal. You can't post nude images online in the US without proof that the individual is 18 years of age or older. A single offense could be a fine of $25,000 and up to 5 years in jail.

It's one thing to block out the names and faces of the individual to prove a point or draw attention. I think when you do it out of malice to hurt individuals, you are stepping over the line. If he picked on the wrong guy, he could be signing checks over to someone the rest of his life. Or even worse yet, he could be praying his insurance policy is up-to-date.

Nice Spot On 2257


I can't believe i didn't think of that! Nice catch.

the mother of all linkbaits?

or just some narcissistic jackass desperate for attention? in this situation i'd much rather have all my fingers and toes than link juice.

i'm on the same page with DG and MrTurner - every redneck fiber of my body tells me this guy should be on the phone with his insurance agent. and be hyper-vigilant for anything that sounds like that banjo music from "Deliverance"....

i went to read Fortuny's actual posts, and i couldn't believe how lightly he seemed to be taking it:

So, if my last post gets me killed, reply here with what you'll say at my funeral. You may think I've gone too far. But I say I haven't gone too far enough!


Okay, so last night was a total bust! No angry mobs with torches and pitchforks. No harassing e-mails or phone calls. I haven't even received a notice from LJ Abuse! Do you have any idea how disappointed I am? This is such an internet letdown.

and he seems super stoked that he's getting press coverage for this - NYT, Wired blog, etc. wouldn't that just exacerbate the situation, making any potentially homicidal subjects of this "experiment" that much more enraged?

Kiss your ass goodbye mister


Wht's up w/ the toast?

Mmmm, great toast Marge!

That's just a great picture of toast. Makes me hungry.


this guy is an attention starved ass.

The requests were for an act between two consenting adults. While I guess the acts offend his morals, they are not illegal. This is not like a site exposing people who have solicited children for sex.

This is just a jerk who wanted to disrupt people's life so he could call himself important.

I hope gets what is coming to him.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.