Hi Rob!
Found your page on Technorati since we were both blogging the same news story. I agree with your sentiments about parental responsibility, however, I have a different take-
This is merely a question of liability. And MySpace is plenty liable. In court, a judge will determine whether or not, after MySpace became aware that sexual predators were using the site to stalk children, did MySpace do everything it could to prevent harm to children?
I say the answer is no. NewsCorp, the owner of Myspace, needed to take Myspace to a for-pay site as soon as they purchased the company. With a credit card purchase for a MySpace account, there would be no question regarding identity of a profile holder, verification of adulthood, or in the case of parents, implied permission for a child to use the site. But NewsCorp instead wanted to keep the popularity of the site and prevent its users from migrating to a competing free site.
And the cost of that competition was sexual assault and in many cases, death. Lawyers would call that negligence.
MySpace can keep spending money on press releases touting the latest ultra-lightweight verification software like Zephyr, but until they go to a for-pay service and proactively police their users for service violations, they cannot claim that they did all they could to prevent harm to children.
BelchSpeak - 11:01am on 01/18/2007
...did MySpace do everything it could to prevent harm to children?
It’s not their job.
Myspace is used by many adults to hook up with sexual partners. Are you now going to argue that Myspace should be making sure that those people don’t have venereal diseases?
NewsCorp, the owner of Myspace, needed to take Myspace to a for-pay site as soon as they purchased the company. With a credit card purchase for a MySpace account, there would be no question regarding identity of a profile holder, verification of adulthood, or in the case of parents, implied permission for a child to use the site.
Absolutely not. First of all, it’s not your place to tell a free website to start charging. Secondly, it wouldn’t stop the problem. Curtail? Most likely. But it wouldn’t stop it.
But NewsCorp instead wanted to keep the popularity of the site and prevent its users from migrating to a competing free site.
This should be clue as to how ridiculous your proposal is.
And the cost of that competition was sexual assault and in many cases, death. Lawyers would call that negligence.
Who cares what a lawyer would argue? They’re masters at shuffling blame onto innocent parties, so this argument of yours is hardly convincing.
MySpace can keep spending money on press releases touting the latest ultra-lightweight verification software like Zephyr, but until they go to a for-pay service and proactively police their users for service violations, they cannot claim that they did all they could to prevent harm to children.
And until you start spending your own time and money policing Myspace for these violations, you can’t claim anything either.
But it’s not your responsibility, you say?
likwidshoe - 11:01am on 01/18/2007
This is not about responsibility. This is about liability. And there is no question whether or not this case will go forward because it will. Myspace, Livejournal, Facebook and others will have their liability examined as to how they make efforts to protect children from predators.
These sites do not have to stop online predators, just put in enough safeguards to prove that they have done what is reasonable to protect children. My assertion is that they have done very little in the way of real protection, especially given how easy it would be to curtail online predatory behavior by moving to a pay service and recording credit card information from members.
Think of it like your inground pool. In most states you have to have a fence around it to provide reasonable protection against small children wandering onto the property and drowning. If you fail to take reasonable steps and a child drowns, you are liable for that death. If a child is big enough to scale the fence and drowns anyways, you are off the hook.
Myspace knows its service is being abused by online predators. The question is, have they instituted reasonable safeguards to protect against it?
BelchSpeak - 12:01pm on 01/18/2007
I think myspace should sue parents for allowing their children to get on the internet without monitoring what they do.
The Whistler - 12:01pm on 01/18/2007
Think of it like your inground pool. In most states you have to have a fence around it to provide reasonable protection against small children wandering onto the property and drowning. If you fail to take reasonable steps and a child drowns, you are liable for that death.
But why should that be so?
What if I’m in the middle of building a new shed and your kid wanders into the back hard and hurts himself with my saw. Why am I liable when you let your kid wander into my yard?
Same goes for myspace. Any responsible parent would be cognizant of the pitfalls present in a site like that and would take precautions before allowing their child onto the site.
It is not the responsibility of these social websites to protect your kids. You protect them.
Rob - 12:01pm on 01/18/2007
But welcome to Say Anything, Belch. I think you’ll like it hear. Stick around and comment on some of the posts. Maybe start a reader blog (you can even cross-post from your current blog if you want).
We have all sorts of fun.
Rob - 12:01pm on 01/18/2007
BelchSpeak said, This is not about responsibility. This is about liability.
One can have responsibility without liability, but one can’t have liability without responsibility. Liability is responsibility.
Myspace, Livejournal, Facebook and others will have their liability examined as to how they make efforts to protect children from predators.
Hence, their responsibility.
My assertion is that they have done very little in the way of real protection, especially given how easy it would be to curtail online predatory behavior by moving to a pay service and recording credit card information from members.
No. You do that and the kids scatter to where it will be free. What have you solved then? Nothing.
Not only that, but you’re dictating in an area you have no business dictating in.
Myspace knows its service is being abused by online predators. The question is, have they instituted reasonable safeguards to protect against it?
How about we all register with the government then? That’s the road you’re taking us down with this kind of logic. After all, wouldn’t it be easier to prevent such things if we were all registered and monitored? Until the government institutes a registration and tracking system, they cannot claim that they did all they could to prevent harm to children.
Nice slippery slope you want to go down.
likwidshoe - 01:01pm on 01/18/2007
why just myspace? Generally those folks hook up via email or an instant messenger service too. They’re as liable as myspace.
Plus the whole internet thing, without that set of tubes this thing wouldn’t be taking place. The “internet” and Algore are responsible too.
If they talk on the phone prior to the assault the phone company must pay. They should have to monitor all phone calls.
Don’t they usually arrange to meet at a mall or something like that? If so the mall operator is responsible.
If the bad guys uses a weapon then of course the company that made the weapon is to blame. (Would it count as a plus if the intended victim was armed and able to defend herself).
Most all crimes were facilitated by the bad guy driving in a car. There you’ve got big automobile, big oil and big roads to blame.
I don’t expect you to get it Belch, but my examples are no less absurd than yours.
The Whistler - 01:01pm on 01/18/2007
My[WasteOf]Space[AndTime] is doomed to become just another revenue source for someone like Napster.
All these toys are great when it’s just a bunch of nerds fooling around but when someone decides they want to make money all the fun is sucked out of it.
freerepublicans.com - 01:01pm on 01/18/2007
you also come across a few really creepy myspace pages like this one.
Hi Rob!
Found your page on Technorati since we were both blogging the same news story. I agree with your sentiments about parental responsibility, however, I have a different take-
This is merely a question of liability. And MySpace is plenty liable. In court, a judge will determine whether or not, after MySpace became aware that sexual predators were using the site to stalk children, did MySpace do everything it could to prevent harm to children?
I say the answer is no. NewsCorp, the owner of Myspace, needed to take Myspace to a for-pay site as soon as they purchased the company. With a credit card purchase for a MySpace account, there would be no question regarding identity of a profile holder, verification of adulthood, or in the case of parents, implied permission for a child to use the site. But NewsCorp instead wanted to keep the popularity of the site and prevent its users from migrating to a competing free site.
And the cost of that competition was sexual assault and in many cases, death. Lawyers would call that negligence.
MySpace can keep spending money on press releases touting the latest ultra-lightweight verification software like Zephyr, but until they go to a for-pay service and proactively police their users for service violations, they cannot claim that they did all they could to prevent harm to children.
...did MySpace do everything it could to prevent harm to children?
It’s not their job.
Myspace is used by many adults to hook up with sexual partners. Are you now going to argue that Myspace should be making sure that those people don’t have venereal diseases?
NewsCorp, the owner of Myspace, needed to take Myspace to a for-pay site as soon as they purchased the company. With a credit card purchase for a MySpace account, there would be no question regarding identity of a profile holder, verification of adulthood, or in the case of parents, implied permission for a child to use the site.
Absolutely not. First of all, it’s not your place to tell a free website to start charging. Secondly, it wouldn’t stop the problem. Curtail? Most likely. But it wouldn’t stop it.
But NewsCorp instead wanted to keep the popularity of the site and prevent its users from migrating to a competing free site.
This should be clue as to how ridiculous your proposal is.
And the cost of that competition was sexual assault and in many cases, death. Lawyers would call that negligence.
Who cares what a lawyer would argue? They’re masters at shuffling blame onto innocent parties, so this argument of yours is hardly convincing.
MySpace can keep spending money on press releases touting the latest ultra-lightweight verification software like Zephyr, but until they go to a for-pay service and proactively police their users for service violations, they cannot claim that they did all they could to prevent harm to children.
And until you start spending your own time and money policing Myspace for these violations, you can’t claim anything either.
But it’s not your responsibility, you say?
This is not about responsibility. This is about liability. And there is no question whether or not this case will go forward because it will. Myspace, Livejournal, Facebook and others will have their liability examined as to how they make efforts to protect children from predators.
These sites do not have to stop online predators, just put in enough safeguards to prove that they have done what is reasonable to protect children. My assertion is that they have done very little in the way of real protection, especially given how easy it would be to curtail online predatory behavior by moving to a pay service and recording credit card information from members.
Think of it like your inground pool. In most states you have to have a fence around it to provide reasonable protection against small children wandering onto the property and drowning. If you fail to take reasonable steps and a child drowns, you are liable for that death. If a child is big enough to scale the fence and drowns anyways, you are off the hook.
Myspace knows its service is being abused by online predators. The question is, have they instituted reasonable safeguards to protect against it?
I think myspace should sue parents for allowing their children to get on the internet without monitoring what they do.
But why should that be so?
What if I’m in the middle of building a new shed and your kid wanders into the back hard and hurts himself with my saw. Why am I liable when you let your kid wander into my yard?
Same goes for myspace. Any responsible parent would be cognizant of the pitfalls present in a site like that and would take precautions before allowing their child onto the site.
It is not the responsibility of these social websites to protect your kids. You protect them.
But welcome to Say Anything, Belch. I think you’ll like it hear. Stick around and comment on some of the posts. Maybe start a reader blog (you can even cross-post from your current blog if you want).
We have all sorts of fun.
BelchSpeak said, This is not about responsibility. This is about liability.
One can have responsibility without liability, but one can’t have liability without responsibility. Liability is responsibility.
Myspace, Livejournal, Facebook and others will have their liability examined as to how they make efforts to protect children from predators.
Hence, their responsibility.
My assertion is that they have done very little in the way of real protection, especially given how easy it would be to curtail online predatory behavior by moving to a pay service and recording credit card information from members.
No. You do that and the kids scatter to where it will be free. What have you solved then? Nothing.
Not only that, but you’re dictating in an area you have no business dictating in.
Myspace knows its service is being abused by online predators. The question is, have they instituted reasonable safeguards to protect against it?
How about we all register with the government then? That’s the road you’re taking us down with this kind of logic. After all, wouldn’t it be easier to prevent such things if we were all registered and monitored? Until the government institutes a registration and tracking system, they cannot claim that they did all they could to prevent harm to children.
Nice slippery slope you want to go down.
why just myspace? Generally those folks hook up via email or an instant messenger service too. They’re as liable as myspace.
Plus the whole internet thing, without that set of tubes this thing wouldn’t be taking place. The “internet” and Algore are responsible too.
If they talk on the phone prior to the assault the phone company must pay. They should have to monitor all phone calls.
Don’t they usually arrange to meet at a mall or something like that? If so the mall operator is responsible.
If the bad guys uses a weapon then of course the company that made the weapon is to blame. (Would it count as a plus if the intended victim was armed and able to defend herself).
Most all crimes were facilitated by the bad guy driving in a car. There you’ve got big automobile, big oil and big roads to blame.
I don’t expect you to get it Belch, but my examples are no less absurd than yours.
My[WasteOf]Space[AndTime] is doomed to become just another revenue source for someone like Napster.
All these toys are great when it’s just a bunch of nerds fooling around but when someone decides they want to make money all the fun is sucked out of it.
you also come across a few really creepy myspace pages like this one.