Archive for: May, 2014

Former Will County Board member alleges revenge porn

In a court filing this month, former Will County Board member Kathleen Konicki provides further details regarding her lawsuit against two former boyfriends, accusing one of them of distributing “damagingly embarrassing” photos of her.

Konicki filed a sworn statement in Will County Circuit Court on May 16, describing photos of her distributed by her ex-boyfriend as revenge porn.

In the lawsuit filed in December, Konicki says Timothy Rathburn, her former boyfriend and an attorney, distributed offensive photos of her in a “damagingly embarrassing and intimate nature” to Will County officials, including Circuit Court Judge Gerald Kinney and State’s Attorney James Glasgow.

Konicki, an attorney, also names another former boyfriend, John Bassett, in the suit, alleging that he gave the photos to Rathburn.

She’s representing herself in the lawsuit and says in the new filing that she tried to retain several attorneys to represent her, but two admitted they would not because of the peripheral involvement of the judge and the state’s attorney. In her affidavit, Konicki said former Will County Judge Roman Okrei, who was advising her as an attorney, encouraged her that Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow would vigorously prosecute her case.

Okrei told her Glasgow might see her case as a “timely and appropriate vehicle for himself as an elected official to step forward into the public fray of revenge porn and take the lead,” the affidavit said.

“He said that my timing couldn’t be better, because the problem of vindictive men lashing out at women by posting intimate pictures on the Internet (‘revenge porn’) was widespread and on the verge of getting public attention and publicity,” Konicki wrote. “He said that women from all walks of life, across the nation, were being targeted with revenge porn.”

The state’s attorney’s office never did take up Konicki’s case—she said Okrei told her “Glasgow has been advised not to get involved, since he, himself, had been sent the pictures,” the affidavit said.

Konicki declined to comment on the lawsuit, saying she was not seeking media attention. Rathburn did not return a call for comment.

The suit seeks damages in excess of $50,000 and alleges intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation and invasion of her right to privacy.

Ex-Will Board member alleges ‘revenge porn’ – SouthtownStar
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

Maryland Governor Signed Bill Against Revenge Porn

ANNAPOLIS, Md. (WJZ) — Added protections from harassment due to broken relationships are signed into law.

Pat Warren reports revenge porn is now a punishable offense.

Annmarie Chiarini’s bad breakup has helped change the way the state views intimate Internet postings.

In a WJZ investigation, Chiarini goes public with her experience as a victim of revenge porn. She tells WJZ an ex-boyfriend posted explicit pictures of her on the Internet. He had taken the pictures with her permission, but posted them in revenge after she broke up with him.

“There I was, and there was my first and last name, and there was the town where I live, and there was the college and the campus where I teach, and there was a solicitation for sex,” she said.

Chiarini went to police for help.

“I sought help from law enforcement, and it was the same shake your head. ‘There’s nothing we can do, no crime has been committed. There’s nothing we can do. Silly girl, go away. There’s nothing we can do,’” said Chiarini.

The extent of the problem became evident as other victims came forward.

“As I’m learning more and starting to understand the Maryland law, I was getting more and more frustrated, and I said, ‘Oh, I’m just going to change the law then,’” Chiarini said. “And that was it. Something clicked and I said, ‘This is what I’m going to do. This is not happening to anyone else.’”

With the help of committed supporters, the House and Senate unanimously passed and the Maryland Governor signed a bill making revenge porn a misdemeanor with up to a year in prison and a $500 fine.

Some Maryland lawmakers wanted to make revenge porn a felony. Arizona’s governor just signed a bill making it a felony in that state.

The Maryland law takes effect October 1.

Bill Signed Into Law Making Revenge Porn A Misdemeanor – CBS Local
Bill Signed Into Law Making Revenge Porn A Misdemeanor
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

Appeals court skeptical over Oracle’s copyright infringement win over SAP


(Image: CNET/CBS Interactive)

A U.S. appeals court “appeared skeptical” on Tuesday about handing Oracle a $1.3 billion damages package previously served by a jury, which was later overturned.

According to the Reuters news agency, Judge William Fletcher called Oracle’s attorney’s figures that were used to drum up the damages figure as “pie in the sky dreaming,” which may lead to the software giant losing the damages it was first awarded.

But if Oracle doesn’t get its way, seven years after the allegations first came to light, the company is gunning for a new trial, reported Bloomberg.

Oracle is taking on German enterprise software powerhouse SAP in a legal ding-dong that led to it admitting massive infringement of Oracle’s copyright.

A jury awarded Oracle the billion-dollar-plus sum in 2010 after an SAP subsidiary, TomorrowNow, unlawfully downloaded millions of Oracle files. SAP bought the company to begin supporting Oracle customers at a lower cost than Oracle charged.

SAP came clean, but the dispute was how much the company should pay Oracle in damages.

But later, U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton found that Oracle had only been able to prove it had suffered damages of $272 million.

However, two of the judges in Tuesday’s case suggested Oracle may in fact deserve a little over $300 million.

Oracle attorney Kathleen Sullivan said internal SAP documents showed the company had expected $900 million revenue by using its strategic acquisition in TomorrowNow to poach customers from Oracle. That figure was enough to convince the lower court that $1.3 billion would suffice for reasonable damages.

But one of the judges on the panel argued that those SAP revenue figures was an objective view of how much the copyrighted material was worth.

The judges did not say when they will issue a ruling on the case.

Appeals court ‘skeptical’ over Oracle’s copyright infringement win over SAP – ZDNet

Read the rest

Four broadcasters file lawsuit against Aereo over copyright infringement

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) – Aereo, backed by Barry Diller’s IAC/InterActiveCorp charges users a low monthly fee to watch live or recorded broadcast TV channels on computers or mobile devices – and does not pay any of the broadcasters.Aereo has urged the high court to hear the case even though it won in the lower court, as it would like a definitive and final answer in regards to the issue.Help end world hunger by going here.

Justice Samuel Alito will not participate in it, according to The Supreme Court, which generally does not disclose why justices are excused. A ruling is expected by the end of this June.

Aereo subscribers can stream live broadcasts of TV channels on mobile devices using miniature antennas. Launched in March 2012 in the New York area, Aereo has since expanded to about 10 cities and plans to enter several more.

The four broadcasters claim that Aereo violates their copyrights on the television programs. The service, they say, represents a threat to their ability to control subscription fees and generate advertising.

The National Football League, Major League Baseball and various media companies, including Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. have all filed court papers in support of the broadcasters.

Aereo’s business model is “built on stealing the creative content of others,” CBS said in a statement last week.

In its defense, Aereo counters that its service does nothing more than provide users what they could obtain with a personal television antenna. “We believe that consumers have a right to use an antenna to access over-the-air television and to make personal recordings of those broadcasts,” Aereo chief executive officer Chet Kanojia said in a statement.
Persuasive grounds

The lawsuit is being watched closely with the utmost seriousness. Cablevision Systems Corporation says that the legal theory advanced by broadcasters to the high court would spell trouble for cloud-based content services and threaten Cablevision’s ability to offer DVR recording to its customers.

“Cablevision remains confident that while the Aereo service violates copyright, the Supreme Court will find persuasive grounds for invalidating Aereo without relying on the broadcasters’ overreaching – and wrong – copyright arguments that challenge the legal underpinning of all cloud-based services,” the company said in a statement.
2014, Distributed by THE NEWS CONSORTIUM.

Four broadcasters file lawsuit against Aereo over copyright infringement – Catholic Online
copyright infringement news – Google News… Read the rest