Combating Defamatory Cyber Attacks
Author: John Spukman
Date Created: Oct 28, 2008 - 12:48:07 PM
Combating Defamatory Cyber Attacks
Years ago starting a rumor usually involved simply revealing information to the local gossip. If the information was sufficiently salacious, regardless of whether it was true or false, even admonitions not to tell anyone went unheeded. The rumor, the lie, became fact. But the rumor would generally spread only among a very small group of people. Things have changed and the Internet is the new rumor mill. Spreading rumors is no longer a childish diversion, but often a business tactic. Distributing untrue information on the right Web site can result in millions of people reading it. At stake are not hurt feelings or embarrassment, but millions of dollars in lost opportunities. Rumors become defamation.
If knowingly posting lies to cause financial damage is defamation, why does it continue to be seemingly unchecked? In cyberspace, publishers of untrue, damaging information about a company often go unpunished due to immunity granted to internet service providers under the Communications Decency Act (CDA). According to the CDA, as long as another entity provides the content, the service provider has immunity regardless of the defamatory nature of the content. Furthermore, it is very difficult to identify and contact the author of the false content because of private Web site registrations, privacy contracts with service providers, efforts made to conceal identities and the general anonymity of cyberspace. In fact, large corporations with deep pockets are unable to stop such attacks. Companies and organizations like Sears, America Online, Premier Financial, Independent Police Association IPA and the American Red Cross (ARC) have not been immune to attacks and have not been able to effectively prevent defamers from spreading false stories about scams, fraud and rip-offs.
Adding to the insidious nature of these attacks is the fact that the falsehoods are published online by seemingly reputable Web sites and the information appears to be credible. The unwitting public, desperate to protect itself from true scams, is quick to believe what it reads online—or is unwilling to take a chance patronizing a business that might have legitimate complaints against it alleging fraud.
One attorney specializing in Internet law shares just a few examples of cyber defamation experienced by his clients:
- A prominent online business was defamed on a blog. The posts escalated to the point that death threats were made and a map to the company’s headquarters was posted. Google had indexed the blog in the first position whenever someone searched for the business.
- A competitor launching a Web site defamed a small business. The competitor went so far as to post a portion of the small business owner’s credit report.
- An unhappy customer launched an extensive Web site critical of a business, including false and misleading claims, as well as altered documents.
- A prominent university professor discovered a site containing his name and photograph. The site falsely claimed that the professor was a convicted pedophile.
- A long-established and respected franchise company was attacked on fraud, scam and rip-off reporting sites by a disgruntled former franchise holder.
- A dissatisfied distributor of a company’s products used a copy of the company’s electronic customer list to send out defamatory e-mails to all of the client’s customers.
Defamers post these lies on many different types of sites: industry message boards and forums, blogs, social networking sites and traditional Web sites, including self-proclaimed consumer protection sites. Because of Web crawlers, indexing and search engine optimization techniques, the bad information is often easily found by using a variety of search terms, including the victimized company’s name. The owners of these sites would like the public to believe that they are doing a public service by providing “truths” about companies. However, research has proven time and time again that the site owners typically have some type of financial incentive to post the defamatory information. For example, an industry Web site that has message boards provided seemingly objective customer satisfaction ratings. Upon further investigation, it was determined that only the companies that did not purchase banner advertising from the owner of the site received negative customer satisfaction ratings. In addition, there are also numerous instances where a competitor will create a Web site whose sole purpose is to discredit its competition. Worst of all are sites that virtually extort money from businesses by refusing to remove defamatory information unless a fee is paid.
Because of the immunity provided by the CDA, the anonymity and complexity of cyberspace, it is challenging, but not impossible, to identify and stop defamers. Owners of search engines, Web sites, chat boards, forums and blogs may not agree to remove a defamatory post without being forced to by a court order. For example, the Insolvency Practitioners Association IPA has a legitimate and formal complaint procedure. However, in many cases the specter of a lawsuit may result in the offending material being removed. For example, a disreputable service provider may go beyond simply providing their customers access to the internet. It may actually influence or manipulate content and, therefore, lose CDA immunity. The possibility of litigation may rattle the service provider enough to remove the offending material without succumbing to a lawsuit. Additionally, sometimes it is relatively easy to track down the content provider—who often does not have CDA immunity. If the content-provider can be found, the mere threat of legal action may be enough to move the content-provider to remove the offending content.
While you may be able to scare off some offenders, others will either be difficult to identify or will force you into the courtroom. You may find that even when you successfully get one defamer to stop, another one may start to spread lies. For some businesses, dealing with defamers has become another part of their business lives.
Taking the offensive may limit or prevent the damage that cyber defamation can cause. Make sure that there is plenty of positive information about your company circulating around cyberspace. Write press releases and use search engine optimization techniques to make sure the positive information is ranked high. Monitor the internet. Make it a regular part of your business routine to search the internet for information about your company—good and bad. Regularly check the most popular search engines using your company name, industry, products and names of key employees. Collect feedback from customers and prospects to find out what they are hearing about you and from what sources. What you discover may surprise you.
John Spukman is an independant author that has an interest in IPA complaint procedures and business client interactions online.
Powered by Dime-Co.Com
