Dorkus Maximus Sues Google Over Porn
Dorkus Maximus Sues Google Over Porn
Filed in the Supreme Court for the State of New York in Nassau County, Toback charges Google with "knowingly generating billions of dollars from the pornography trade and illicit profiteers, in intentional and reckless disregard of its legal duties and the well-being of our nation's children." Google does this, according to the suit, with sponsored search results through its pay-per-click advertising model. Immediately the blogosphere lit up, accusing Toback of political posturing and grandstanding with little knowledge of the search industry or computers themselves. Toback admits to being "not the most computer-literate guy" and learning of Google's Safe Search function just days before filing. Toback earned the honor of Dorkus Maximus from Alex Eckelberry, president of security software company Sunbelt: "You have to read the complaint. It's just a blithering mish-mash of bombastic stream of consciousness about mall owners, Google and China, with multiple uses of the word 'obscene.' I'm not a lawyer, but I've read a few complaints and I'm just astounded as to the absolute lack of evidence." Eric Goldman, however, is a lawyer, and expects the lawsuit to be dismissed quickly: "I can confirm that this lawsuit is just a publicity stunt, and a pathetic one at that. Among other evidence of cluelessness, the complaint uses a wacky definition of 'child pornography' (defined as 'repulsive material that is illegal to distribute to children') that no knowledgeable lawyer would use. "Between the lack of standing, the lack of private causes of action, the 230 immunization, and the overall junkiness of this complaint, I think this lawsuit has zero chance of surviving a motion to dismiss. NONE."
Filed in the Supreme Court for the State of New York in Nassau County, Toback charges Google with "knowingly generating billions of dollars from the pornography trade and illicit profiteers, in intentional and reckless disregard of its legal duties and the well-being of our nation's children." Google does this, according to the suit, with sponsored search results through its pay-per-click advertising model. Immediately the blogosphere lit up, accusing Toback of political posturing and grandstanding with little knowledge of the search industry or computers themselves. Toback admits to being "not the most computer-literate guy" and learning of Google's Safe Search function just days before filing. Toback earned the honor of Dorkus Maximus from Alex Eckelberry, president of security software company Sunbelt: "You have to read the complaint. It's just a blithering mish-mash of bombastic stream of consciousness about mall owners, Google and China, with multiple uses of the word 'obscene.' I'm not a lawyer, but I've read a few complaints and I'm just astounded as to the absolute lack of evidence." Eric Goldman, however, is a lawyer, and expects the lawsuit to be dismissed quickly: "I can confirm that this lawsuit is just a publicity stunt, and a pathetic one at that. Among other evidence of cluelessness, the complaint uses a wacky definition of 'child pornography' (defined as 'repulsive material that is illegal to distribute to children') that no knowledgeable lawyer would use. "Between the lack of standing, the lack of private causes of action, the 230 immunization, and the overall junkiness of this complaint, I think this lawsuit has zero chance of surviving a motion to dismiss. NONE."
posted by jcollinsonrams at 12:43 PM
0 comments
