Sex Tech: Hulk Hogan vs. Gawker, Gawker vs. Fleshbot, China targets Apple

Sex Tech: Hulk Hogan vs. Gawker, Gawker vs. Fleshbot, China targets Apple

Summary: A collection of notable new sex and technology news items. Covers innovation, legal issues, IP, privacy, controversies, business and more.

SHARE:

Nick Denton wants his Fleshbot sale money, Hulk Hogan wants Gawker to remove his sex video, China is back on the anti-porn and anti-Apple warpath.

Google Glass censors what you say, and you'll have no choice

Like many insulting, worrisome and invasive things we're starting to learn about Google Glass, it has been revealed that Google Glass censors your own, self-spoken words that Glass deems unsafe for children - and there is no way to turn it off.

If we wanted to be treated like children all our lives, this would be great. Unfortunately, this is yet another completely out of touch choice Google has made for users of its products, who live in the real world, watch HBO, and even - gasp! - might want to listen to that obscene song by CeeLo Green.

Nick Denton and Lux Alptraum in Fleshbot Sale Legal Scuffle

Gawker Media founder, owner and Managing Editor Nick Denton says he hasn’t been paid for Fleshbot.

logo.fleshbot

Apparently Denton sold the 11-year-old porn site last year for $100,000 to then-employee Noa Gottlieb, who, according to court papers, is also known as “Lux Alptraum.”

Denton alleges Ms. Gottlieb signed a promissory note and that the total would be paid in four installments that were supposed to begin May 1 of last year. Ms. Gottlieb - as Lux Alptraum - was handed editorial control of Fleshbot under Mr. Denton in 2008 after the porn site's founding editors and cultivators of its unique, whimsical, critical and genuine voice (including myself) gracefully exited in the events surrounding the Denton/Gottlieb decision.

This week, Nick Denton and his legal team claim that payment from Lux Alptraum never happened.

According to a motion filed by Denton in Supreme Court of New York, “Fleshbot made none of the $25,000 payments and despite repeated requests for payment still owes Gawker $100,000 plus interest.”

Gottlieb claims in her court papers that actions by Denton/Gawker rendered the original promissory note null and void.

The Fifth Amendment, and Encrypting Your Data

The encryption issue is front and center as a federal magistrate is refusing to order a Wisconsin computer scientist to decrypt his data that the authorities seized from kiddie-porn suspect Jeffrey Feldman. The reason is simple: The Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination protects even those suspected of unsavory crimes.

Litigating and prosecuting involuntary porn - with Hulk Hogan?

Without My Consent's Weekly Roundup is the nonprofit's email newsletter covering the emergent arena of legal procedures and rights concerning victims of so-called "revenge" or non-consensual porn posted about them online by harassers, stalkers, those with intent to harm or endanger their victims - you know, perpetrators who should generally be dropped into a ravenous alligator pit while our legal system struggles to understand even the most basic digital privacy rights.

Anyway... every week, Without My Consent's newsletter (signup link) has really interesting items.

For instance, the founder of EndRevengePorn.com – and victim of revenge pornography – has filed suit against the individual responsible for posting the pornographic material and personal information of their plaintiff. Additionally, she has filed suit against four porn websites (AnonIB.com, PinkMeth.tv, XHamster.com, and SextingPics.com) - as well as their servers, subscribers, users, and others who propagate revenge pornography.

Also in WMC's newsletter, a judge told Gawker to remove their Hulk Hogan Sex Tape Post. Gawker removed the video but linked to another copy of it, and refused to take down the post. Now Hulk Hogan Wants Gawker Punished for Disobeying Court Order.

Oh, China: Ad For 'Chief Porn Identification Officer'

A third-party internet security firm in Beijing called Anquan recently posted an opening for the position "chief porn identification officer".

The company was started in 2010 to "combat bad information on the internet" and promote greater control of pornographic content on the web. Its partners and members include internet giants, like Baidu and Tencent, as well as government agencies that regulate the internet in China.

Apple Named in China Porn App Investigation

Apple is in an article listing a number of websites and app stores investigated for providing pornographic content in China. Following a March call for a new campaign against porn a government regulator named Apple’s app store as a source of “obscene pornographic” content and ordered it to remove the content, submit a report about the violation, and take measures to prevent future violations.

The recent article has drawn Chinese Internet users’ speculation that the Chinese government is determined to push Apple out of China, its second largest market.

How the FBI cracked a “sextortion” plot against pro poker players

"At 8:05am on the morning of December 1, 2010, an FBI search warrant team swarmed up to a Silicon Valley home on an unusual mission: find the "sextortionist" who had been blackmailing pro poker players over the Internet."

Image of the Apple Store in Hong Kong - Wikicommons: SIMGO200.

Topics: Apple, Google, Government Asia, iOS, Legal

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

5 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RevengePorn is here to stay

    I don't see how that could be actionable in a civil court. It's not exactly against the law per se, and it seems difficult to draw conclusions on how one party suffered some harm that they need a court to help make them whole, financial or otherwise.

    Maybe they can make an argument that these sites are profiting on their image? The problem stems from the subject being the one sending their lovers the images, meaning that it has left their control without a contract stipulating their legal use. They have only themselves to blame.
    Vapur9
    • Yup

      Although morally wrong I see that if they willfully videoed themselves and did not protect the vid, like copyrighting it, then they really cannot do anything about it.
      Under law it might eventually be covered by the reasonable privacy rules.
      Public security cams normally can not be placed where one expects reasonable privacy.
      In some places in the common area of a public restroom is OK but not over the stalls.
      MoeFugger
  • The Fifth Amendment, and Encrypting Your Data

    His disks are encrypted and he is not ordered to unlock them.
    Seems that is like him locking the doors to his house or car and saying that if he lets the police search it then that is self incrimination even with a warrant.
    MoeFugger
    • Not really a fair analogy

      I'm not a lawyer, nor a police officer, but as far as I know a warrant does not mean someone is forced to cooperate with the police as they search their home. The police are welcome to bust into the property via their own means, and the warrant protects the evidence they collect from being dismissed as illegally collected.

      I can lock my doors, and the police, with a warrant, are free bust them down. Likewise, I can encrypt my data, and the police are free, with a warrant, to break my encryption. In neither case am I compelled by law to unlock my doors, nor my files.
      Kichae
      • Yes, you are

        Hmmm. I believe courts have held that you are required to hand over paper files if the police have a warrant, even if those files are in a locked filing cabinet. The warrant will simply state that you must hand over the files.

        So, what if the warrant states that you must hand over a hard drive and the encryption key? They cannot force you to do the unencryption, but if the warrant demands the encryption key, that's just information, like paper files, which a warrant can require of you. Reporters have been jailed for refusing to name their sources.

        That said, I'd probably pretend to have lost the key. People get away with saying "I don't remember" all the time.
        daniel1948x