Quoted

“When I was being defended by attorneys for Google, I thought my right to privacy was being protected. But that right fell through the cracks. Without any warning, I was put on a silver platter for the press to attack me. I would think that a multi-billion dollar conglomerate would protect the rights of all its users.”

Skanks of NYC blogger Rosemary Port, who plans to sue Google for $15 million for complying with a court order to reveal the identity of the person who posted insulting comments about model Liskula Cohen.

 
 

Share this Post



 
 
 
  • hungry ron

    sour grapes.,

  • ToNYC

    I thought you needed to sue for damages! All this formerly anonymous skank spanker did was gain the attention that she seeks. RP shanker, your 15 minutes is up.

  • RedRat

    There is more to this story than merely calling the model a “skank” he also called her a “Ho”. Now one may debate what “skank” means, it is not clear if it really has a hard definition; however, the term “Ho” in common American Language means whore or prostitute. What in effect the guy did was call the model a prostitute, i.e., receiving money for sexual services. He has accused her of a crime. Unless he has direct evidence, he has indeed defamed her and therefore liable under law.

    According to the model, she lost jobs because of the posting. Now the various people doing the hiring of the model should not have used internet comments as a basis of either hiring or not-hiring a person. Sadly, far too many anonymous bloggers are quite willing to sling terms about on the internet. But that is another issue with casting and hiring agencies.

    Now many want to defend the blogger in terms of free speech. However, free speech does not mean that we can all go willy-nilly around accusing people of crime or breaking the law without supporting evidence. Hiding behind anonymity to make wrongful or hurtful comments about an individual was never what the Founding Fathers in writing our Constitution really had in mind. If indeed the blogger had evidence that the model accepted money for sex, then he/she should have published it to back up the claim of being a “Ho”.

  • sausalito cynic

    Hello? She thinks she’s going to sue because Google complied with a court order? I suppose there might be enough unemployed and bored lawyers out there that one would take the case for recreation, but her complaint is complete nonsense. It is so ridiculous that I think ToNYC must be right, she is just making these statements for the attention.

 
 
css.php