CL Experiments Reverse

Savage Love

2006-09-21T12:39:00.000-07:00

"What strikes me as tragic about this mess is that the men who are suffering the most for the high crime of wanting to meet a kinky woman — the men who shared their real names, numbers, places of employment — were doing the decent, responsible thing. Women into BDSM exist, and they take out personal ads to find men who share their kinks. People like me tell submissive women (and men) to take some simple precautions before hooking up with a new person — get his real name, get his real phone number, have your first meeting in a public place, ask him to tell you where he works, ask for references. A kinky top is asking a kinky bottom to trust him — not to actually harm her, to respect her limits, to honor her safe word — and a top can earn that trust by sharing his real name, phone number, and other info that will allow the bottom to confirm that he is who he says he is.

That’s why Fortuny’s stunt pisses me off so much. It’s the men that did the right thing — again, the guys who shared their real names and phone numbers, the men who sent face pictures and not just cock shots — who are going to suffer the most. However kinky these guys are, however naive they are (some personal ads are too good to be true, fellas), they shouldn’t be punished for doing the right and honorable thing."

More on LA Weekly

Legal and Ethical Concerns Raised by Posting Replies to Sex Ad

2006-09-15T07:19:00.000-07:00

"Internet vigilantes have engaged spammers and scam artists and posted results of their conversations online. Others expose sexual predators they purposely seek out in chat rooms.

In this case, however, the men who replied to Fortuny's posting did not appear to be doing anything illegal, so the outing has no social value other than to prove that someone could ruin lives online, said Jonathan Zittrain, a law professor at Oxford and Harvard universities."

NWSource.com (read more)

Few Are Laughing Over Sick Online Joke

2006-09-14T08:25:00.000-07:00

Robert hits the nail on the head, doesn't he?

"You have to wonder if what Fortuny just did is such a big crack-up, why so few are laughing. "

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/284734_robert12x.html

More Info On Jason

2006-09-13T09:48:00.000-07:00

Possible Updated Address:

320 10th St
Kirkland, WA 98033

Telephone: 425-443-1573

AIM: RFJason

Bloggers' FAQ - Intellectual Property

2006-09-12T14:45:00.000-07:00

A few articles on Eff.org explains why the CL Experiment was not only harmful but illegal as well.

Bloggers' FAQ - Privacy

The following are highlights related to the CL Experiment. Please click here for the full article.

What are private facts?

Private facts are personal details about someone that have not been disclosed to the public. A person's sexual orientation, a sex-change operation, and a private romantic encounter could all be private facts. Once publicly disclosed by that person, however, they move into the public domain.

Can I be sued for publishing somebody else's private facts?

Some jurisdictions allow lawsuits for the publication of private facts. In California, for example, the elements are (1) public disclosure; (2) of a private fact; (3) that is offensive to a reasonable person; and (4) which is not a legitimate matter of public concern. Publication on a blog would generally be considered public disclosure. However, if a private fact is deemed "newsworthy," it may be legal to print it even if it might be considered "offensive to a reasonable person."

What is "intrusion into seclusion"?

Intrusion into seclusion occurs when you intrude upon the solitude or seclusion of another person or his private affairs or concerns, if the intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. It generally comes up in the context of paparazzi photographing celebrities, but covers any reasonable expectation of privacy that is intruded upon. If the person intruded upon gave you consent to do it - i.e., gave you permission to take his picture or write about him - then you have a defense against this claim. Interception of an electronic communication (i.e., an email or IM chat) can raise additional legal issues, such as federal wiretap laws.

Pissed off about the CL Experiment?

2006-09-11T14:37:00.000-07:00

The uncreative, cruel and downright bland so called CL "Experiment" has been making waves across the internet.

http://blog.wired.com/27BStroke6/index.blog?entry_id=1553329

To give the "scientist" a taste of his own medicine, we've decided to post his whois information from his rfjason.com website which he has deleted but apparently didn't realize his whois information was public.

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://rfjason.com
http://www.betterwhois.com/bwhois.cgi?domain=rfjason.com

Registrant:
RFJason
726 Kirkland Cir
Apt C203
Kirkland, WA 98033
United States of America

Registrar: DomainPeople Inc.

Domain Name: rfjason.com
Created on .............Wed Oct 18 23:23:23 2000
Expires on .............Thu Oct 19 02:45:15 2006
Record last updated on .Sun Jun 26 16:38:53 2005

Administrative Contact:
RFJason
Jason Fortuny
726 Kirkland Cir
Apt C203
Kirkland, WA
98033, US
(425)5765417
(425)5765417
RFJason@Hotmail.com

Technical Contact:
RFJason
Jason Fortuny
726 Kirkland Cir
Apt C203
Kirkland, WA
98033, US
(425)5765417
(425)5765417
RFJason@Hotmail.com

Domain servers in listed order:
ns0.xname.org 195.20.105.149
ns1.xname.org

(rfjason.com)

Registry Status: ACTIVE
Registry Status: ok