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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
prefer National Blacklist to be a "deterrent" to male clients behaving
badly, than a consequence of it.
Blacklist: The Law and Anonymous Free Speech
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
three cases, spanning from 1960 to 1999, the Supreme Court
has reaffirmed that:
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."
principle that sacrificing anonymity "might deter perfectly
peaceful discussions of public matters of importance."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
- 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
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.
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.