The Internet, The Law, and National Blacklist

Prior to the advent of the internet, most speech could reach only a limited audience, like family, acquaintances, co-workers, and neighbors. The internet has dramatically changed that because today just a single voice or internet posting can reach thousands, if not millions, of people, and those who are discussed are painfully aware of it. These people may try to remove or squelch this free expression and may be willing to devote lots of money in an attempt to silence a voice or complaint about them.

Free speech is a "Federally protected right" and important precedents have been established by the US Supreme Court in regards to Free Speech on the internet. Several advocacy groups like FSC, Free Speech Coalition, ACLU American Civil Liberties Union, and Public Citizen, have been working diligently to preserve our free speech rights on the internet, while there are others out there who would seek to deprive some individuals or websites of their Free Speech Rights.

While National Blacklist was established to foster safety for female escorts, there are some male customers or hobbyists (men who frequently use escorts) out there who will want to deprive escorts the right to exchange safety information, especially when it's their names that wind up on our registry. Through this platform it means escorts can be empowered and warn each other by exchanging the names and contact information regarding bad or dangerous clients they come in contact with.

Hobbyists have had for a long time many web sites of their own to review and exploit escorts for their own security or pleasure, by posting and sharing escort's photos, contact information, and intimate details of their encounters, which thus puts escorts in several kinds of jeopardy. While these escort review web sites were intentionally created to protect hobbyist's interests in assuring them that any particular escort is not a rip off or an undercover vice cop, they don't seem to appreciate the need for escorts to protect themselves in much the same way against bad male clients.

Regardless of how one feels about adult dating and escorting as an occupation, or the ladies who engage in the profession, female escorts are quite vulnerable and are very much deserving of the same rights and protection as other women to not be physically abused, robbed, raped, harassed, stalked, etc.

For men who do not like the idea of possibly being posted on National Blacklist because there may be an uncomfortable public stigma attached to them for privately employing female escorts, this is all the more reason why they should behave themselves when employing the services of adult companionship. If you want to avoid the embarrassment of publicly being associated with female escorts, one would think you would be extra careful to avoid ever being posted here for any offense, especially ripping off, or physically abusing a female escort. We understand most men, especially those who are married, would not want the attention, nor take the risk of public exposure of getting caught for employing female escorts. But now even more so, by being placed on our directory and having their private activities come out along with the fact that they acted inappropriately or abusively, this is all the more reason for National Blacklist.

We'd prefer National Blacklist to be a "deterrent" to male clients behaving badly, than a consequence of it.

National Blacklist: The Law and Anonymous Free Speech

Internet Free Speech Presents New Opportunities

The rapid growth of the internet and internet technologies provides an excellent opportunity for escorts to have their voices heard on a wide variety of issues, especially matters that concern their personal security. The internet affords escorts the ability to exchange ideas and vital safety information with escorts abroad.

Protecting the Right to Speak Anonymously

While there will be certain men who will not appreciate the fact that their names and bad behaviors will be posted in our registry, they will also be unhappy in that they no longer will be able to operate under their cloak of darkness of their bad intentions. Once they discover their name is in our registry, they may posture and threaten us with law suits, they may threaten the escorts who make the posts themselves, but in doing so they knowingly or unknowingly risk bringing more public attention to themselves and possible criminal charges.

They will also have to face the First Amendment Right of websites like National Blacklist to exist, and an escort's rights to share vital safety information with other escorts. The Supreme Court gave precedent and recognizes the right to speak anonymously stating, "Libel is factual statement about an identifiable entity or living individual which, if believed, would influence a reader's opinion about a person defamed either by reflecting badly on that person's character or harming person's reputation or diminishing person's respect in a community." In this instance the only community we are concerned with is the escort community. And if your reputation is compromised so that a female escort chooses not to engage your business, we hardly think that is grounds for a law suit, as this process is no different than being rejected for a job, a financial loan, or an apartment lease, based on your publicly assessable credit history or background check. If a post on National Blacklist winds up affecting your marriage, your family, or your employment, one would have to ask you why you would risk seeing escorts and put your name, reputation, family, and livelihood at risk in the first place?

What Unhappy Bad CLients Are Up Against!  Public Citizen "Gripe Sites" and Our  Representation

A "gripe site" is a web site established to empower citizens by allowing them to complain and share information about a person, a product, a small business, a corporation, workers unions, a government body, or political figure. Not surprisingly, powerful people or institutions often do not take kindly to being criticized, and they have invented a variety of ways to try to suppress the speech of their adversaries but to no avail.

Public Citizen has been in the forefront of the legal defense of the First Amendment right to maintain a gripe site, defending against claims that challenge the domain names of gripe sites, the use of certain meta tags or other devices to call the public's attention to the sites, and baseless claims of libel or other torts that are invoked as a basis for shutting down critics.

Libel/Slander

In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan , the Supreme Court recognized that expansive libel protection chills speech because speakers will be less likely to publish if they can be punished merely for being wrong. Therefore, the First Amendment requires plaintiffs to prove "actual malice" (knowing or reckless disregard for the truth of the statement). Public figures include those with fame, notoriety, and those who have injected themselves into the public debate on an issue. However, in Gertz v. Welch , the Court limited this expansive protection to public figure, not public causes: a publisher of defamatory statements about an individual who is neither a public official nor a public figure may not claim protection against liability for defamation on the ground that the statements concern an issue of public or general interest. Private figures must prove that a statement is false, and that the speaker engaged in some degree of negligence (mere falsity of the statement is insufficient). Laws vary state to state.

Anonymity

In three cases, spanning from 1960 to 1999, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that:

"Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority ... It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular or weaker individuals from retaliation--and their ideas from suppression at the hand of an intolerant or irresponsible society."

"The principle that sacrificing anonymity "might deter perfectly peaceful discussions of public matters of importance."

"The ability to conceal one's identity while communicating, enables the expression of political ideas, personal ideas, the practice of religious belief, all without fear of government intimidation or any public or individual's retaliation."

Anonymity has been an appealing characteristic for the majority of Internet users. Individuals are able to post to message boards, visit chat-rooms, and browse informational sites without revealing their identity. This anonymity allows those engaged in unpopular, controversial, or embarrassing activity to seek and disseminate information without sacrificing their privacy or reputations.

In the first appellate decision to address the issue, a New Jersey appeals court established stringent procedural and evidentiary standards that must be met before the identity of an anonymous online poster can be disclosed through litigation. The court recognized the constitutional right to communicate anonymously and refused to order the identification of a "John Doe" speaker who had posted comments on a Yahoo! message board. 

Pete Blackshaw, chief marketing and customer satisfaction officer for Intelliseek, said, "Because the Web has become a megaphone for vocal consumers, it's like it 'word-of-mouth on steroids,' and it can be positive and negative." Consumers who really love a company or a product can devote a great deal of time to developing Web sites or Web content to express just how much they love it. But the reverse is true as well. And irked consumers can speak with very loud voices. This is where National Blacklist comes in. When Escorts feel the need to protect themselves against bad clients, our platform exists to support them by giving them the ability to easily post and share vital safety information.

Defamation

In the most general terms, defamation is the issuance of a false statement about another person, which causes that person to suffer harm. Defamation can come in either the form of libel (written defamation) or slander (oral defamation). To succeed in a case for defamation, you will have to prove several key elements and we will leave those for you and your attorneys to figure out if you feel you have sufficient cause, but the following criteria will be your toughest court assignments.

• Defamatory: Meaning the plaintiff must establish that the statements in question were actually defamatory. For example, the language must do more than simply annoy a person or hurt a person's feelings. (Postings by escorts to National Blacklist do not make assertions to a persons character, more so they just report incidents that occurred between the client and the escort, or how the escort felt while in the presence of said bad client.)

• Falsity: The statements must be absolutely false; whereby truth is a defense to a defamation claim. Generally, this is difficult because the plaintiff bears the burden of proof of establishing falsity. (If an escort has phone records of you and her having communications your case will be in real jeopardy. Since most escorts do not take blocked calls, she will have phone records, and/or email records, verifying your contacting each other).

• Statements of fact: The statements in question must be objectively verifiable as false statements of fact. In other words, the statements must be provable as false. (Caveat: Expressions of opinion can imply an assertion of objective facts. See Milkovich v. Lorain Journal.) As stated above in Falsity, the burden of proof to establish falsity lies with the plaintiff.

• Damages: The false and defamatory statements must cause actual injury or special damages. The only damages anyone should incur by being listed on National Blacklist is that they may fall out of favor with female escorts who may no longer wish to take your business. We believe no citizen has any constitutionally protected right to employ escorts, especially if their reputation in the escort community has been compromised by their own malice.

If you suffer any other repercussions because you have been posted on our registry and for abusing an escort in any way, the warning postings in our registry might be viewed as you causing your own undoing.

If your interaction with female escorts becomes a matter of public record because you chose to go public with a lawsuit, against National Blacklist or the escort who made the posting about you, you alone will take responsibility for the risk of bringing attention to your case and the risky public exposure and scrutiny that may accompany it.

*If you send us any emails with threats of lawsuits, your emails will be ignored. We've been instructed by our attorneys not to respond to such matters. When we hear from your attorney then we'll take you seriously.

Defenses and Privileges
There are numerous defenses and privileges to a defamation claim to protect National Blacklist and any escort who makes postings to the National Blacklist registry. While many of these defenses vary from state to state, sometimes, a particular party has carte blanche to make certain statements even if they are false. This is called an absolute privilege. Other privileges can be established as long as certain conditions are met.

Some of the more common defenses and privileges include:

• Truth or substantial truth: Truth is generally a complete defense. Many jurisdictions have adopted the substantial-truth doctrine, which protects a defamation defendant as long as the "gist" of the story is true. Since postings on National Blacklist are from escorts themselves and their personal assessment of your experience together, this will be a difficult one for you to hold them accountable for.

• Statements in judicial, legislative, and administrative proceedings: Defamatory statements made in these settings by participants are considered absolutely privileged. For example, a lawyer in a divorce case could not be sued for libel for comments he or she made during a court proceeding. This is not applicable to National Blacklist or escorts who post on National Blacklist.

• Fair report or fair comment: This privilege varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Generally, it provides a measure of protection to a defendant who reports on the deliberations of a public body, such as a city council meeting. This is not applicable to National Blacklist or escorts who post on National Blacklist.

• Neutral-reporting privilege: Protects for example, news organizations when they publish statements, even reckless statements, made by others about a public figure even if the press suspects the statements are not true. As one federal appeals court wrote in 1977 when describing the privilege: "We do not believe that the press may be required under the First Amendment to suppress newsworthy statements merely because it has serious doubts regarding their truth." The neutral-reporting privilege differs from the similar fair-report privilege in that fair report generally applies only when the allegedly defamatory statements are made directly from a public record, public meeting or government press release. Neutral reporting applies to statements outside the context of official government proceedings or records. Not all jurisdictions recognize the neutral-reporting privilege. The U.S. Supreme Court has never directly ruled on it. Since National Blacklist only provides a platform for escorts to exchange information regarding their bad client experiences, we believe we may have some protection under Neutral Reporting privilege, or this may not apply to us at all, because National Blacklist, nor anyone on its staff, actually makes the postings that appear in the registry. According to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, web hosts of 3rd party posting websites are not to be treated as the publishers of the content posted by its user and members.

• Libel-proof plaintiffs: This defense holds that some plaintiffs have such lousy reputations that essentially they are libel-proof. The theory is that one cannot harm someone's reputation when that person already has a damaged reputation. This may or may not apply.

• Rhetorical hyperbole: Some courts will hold that certain language in certain contents (editorial/opinion column/slang expressions) is understood by the readers to be figurative language not to be interpreted literally.Most likely this will apply to the escorts regarding their bad client postings on National Blacklist.

• Retraction statutes: Nearly every state possesses a statute that allows a defamation defendant to retract, or take back, a libelous publication. Some of these statutes bar recovery, while others prevent the defendant from recovering so-called punitive damages. National Blacklist, while under the Terms of Use, takes no responsibility for the 3rd postings on this web site by the escorts who post, has no problem altering or retracting any statements, or removing them from the data base, if they are "proven" to be false.

We put together this section to show you what Federal Laws are in place and how the laws regarding 3rd party posting websites, the Free Speech Rights are of individuals, and libel and defamation laws, and how they all may or may not apply to National Blacklist, and its users.

Lastly, National Blacklist and the female escorts who use our web site for safety and protection, sincerely thank the powerful organizations below that exist, who fight everyday to protect everyone's rights for Freedom of Speech.