No Anonymity for Plaintiffs Suing Ashley Madison Over Hack, Judge Rules


#1

NY Times:

No Anonymity for Plaintiffs Suing Ashley Madison Over Hack, Judge Rules

Plaintiffs suing Ashley Madison, a popular online dating service, over a computer hacking attack that stole the personal data of millions of users will have to be publicly identified to proceed with the case, a federal judge ruled.Forty-two plaintiffs seeking to represent a class of users of the website, which markets itself to people seeking sexual affairs outside of their marriages or committed relationships, sought to pursue litigation anonymously, as John Does, “to reduce the risk of potentially catastrophic personal and professional consequences that could befall them and their families,” according to court papers.

Hackers gained access to the company’s computer systems in July 2015 and later leaked personal information related to more than 30 million accounts.
The plaintiffs said Avid Dating Life Inc., which owns and operates the website, failed to safeguard their personal and financial information, marketed a “full delete removal” service that did not purge user account information from its database, and populated its accounts with fake female users to lure male customers.
The ruling, by Judge John A. Ross of the United States District Court in the Eastern District of Missouri, noted that plaintiffs in cases involving accusations of rape, child sexual abuse and other sensitive matters have been allowed to use pseudonyms. Other court cases, though, have found that mere embarrassment was insufficient to outweigh the presumption of openness and public scrutiny in judicial proceedings.
“Moreover, the personal and financial information plaintiffs seek to protect has already been released on the Internet and made available to the public,” he wrote in the ruling, which was dated April 6 and was brought to light earlier this week in Ars Technica.

I think the judge is right. On one level I do feel sorry for the plaintiffs even though they were up to no good. To paraphrase Trump they’re sad, just sad.


#2

Judge made the right call. Their anonymity has already been destroyed anyway (which is why they’re suing). No reason to override the default openness of our legal proceedings to protect that which has already been lost.

And frankly this just seems to be a case of the plaintiffs getting their comeuppance. They violate the sanctity of their marriages, the trust of their partners in their relationships and now they’re trying to profit from that indiscretion? They should have to go through the fire if they expect to come out of this with a cash settlement.


#3

Wow. Judge much?


#4

In the case of something as blatantly wrong, not to mention boneheaded as signing up for a website designed for cheating on your spouse? You’re darn right I’m judgemental. :mad:


#5

And you know for a fact that every person who registered on that site was married with full intention to cheat on their spouse?


#6

Do you think there were some there who weren’t??

Padres is right. Many probably were.
If we cannot judge, how could we say what is right and what is wrong??

We cannot judge the SOUL of a person, that’s for God alone.
But we can judge the actions of a person.
Judging must be done with RIGHTEOUS judging - not out of hate or jealousy, or any other human emotion.

Jesus said that how we judge, we will be judged. Mathew 7.1…

I’m sure Padres endeavors to be faithful if he is married. So he’s judging correctly…

GG


#7

Yes, I do. It is called curiosity.

Probably? The vast majority of couples in America use birth control, so according to your reasoning, we can say that Padres probably uses birth control.

You do seem to have that part down pretty well.

Then I am totally baffled as to the “mad” face that Padres included in his post.

For myself, I tend to worry about my own doings, not those of others.


#8

I don’t understand much of what you replied. I’m sorry about that.

But you should be worried about the doings of others. That’s what the new evangelization is all about: Teaching others about their catholic faith.

For instance, if two gay people are living together - do you just agree to it?
My son went to a gay wedding. i found that very disturbing. Would YOU have gone?

We should take a stand. Why do you think we’re in the mess we’re in today. Because some people don’t like to worry about anybody else and just worry about themselves.

The mad face is because persons who are MARRIED should not be looking for dates.

(did I misunderstand something??).

GG


#9

I don’t agree nor do I disapprove because it is none of my business. What makes you think that it is any of yours?

Me? No, but apparently your son has a different point of view. If you are all about the “new evangelization” and teaching others about their Catholic faith, then it seems that you need to start in your own backyard instead of worrying about anonymous people on an internet website.

Do you mean like so many of the leftist groups that are out there today?

And so you are going to convert the masses by word and the sword? Good luck.


#10

Oh my gosh.

Good night and peace.

GG


#11

You can’t possibly know that, so don’t claim to.:rolleyes:


#12

Tim is absolutely right. You can’t possibly know why anyone signed up…if they were married…if they had any intention of cheating.

Pretty sure when I first heard about the site back when I was a freshmen in college I created an account to scope it out, since I was in disbelief that it actually existed.


#13

No I don’t, but as I said, boneheaded and blatantly wrong. Why would anyone sign up for it if they weren’t looking to cheat? (and mind you they only cater to married people, not singles)


#14

Oh, and I’m sure that every person registered was, indeed, married since the site “only cater to married people, not singles.” We all take strict heed to user agreements, don’t we?

Didn’t you see the story that said the vast majority of women on the site were false profiles?


#15

I did see it, and I can’t say I’m surprised in the slightest. Men have been pretending to be women on the web since before the days of AOL dial up. It would track that they’d carry this over to a despicable cheating website.

And again, I understand not all people who signed up for it were married, or even the sex they claimed to be. But the fact they signed up for it at all speaks volumes to me. A site like that should have been ignored. Going on to it at all, even in jest or out of morbid curiousity is akin to calling one of those old 1-900-XXX-XXXX numbers as a joke and then being surprised when it comes back to bite you.

I understand I’m being highly judgemental here, but for me there’s few things worse than cheating on your partner. My wife often jokes she’d never worry about me cheating on her because she wouldn’t have to kick my censored if I ever did. I’d kick my own censored plenty. Even screwing around with something like that in jest just raises my hackles.


#16

You’re not being highly judgemental Padres - you’re right. We, as Christians, are supposed to stand up for what is right and good. We’re supposed to avoid evil and the APPEARANCE of evil.

Some of us read the bible but we come away not understanding that we’re supposed to live what it says. I think Jesus wasn’t just wasting words back there. I think He meant what he said. Like for instance Mathw 5:27-28 I think this would fall into this category…

Oh. BTW. How does a boy make believe he’s a girl on these sites. Once the two start writing to each other, wouldn’t it come through? I know on these threads if one is male or female. No response really required.

Keep believing in what is right and don’t be afraid to say it!

GG


#17

Fine but just keep in mind that not everyone is as righteous as you.


#18

Is it wrong to be righteous?

GG


#19

I have to say that these plantiffs had it coming. They gave their personal information - including credit cards - out to a site whose motto is “Life is short. Have an affair.” Then, when the massively blackmail-ready records of that site were obtained by a third party, they think their best course of action is to go after the company encouraging their attempts at infidelity. Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because they don’t want their names released?

Sorry, but I can’t muster up much of an apology for such a massive, willful combination of selfishness, greed, hubris, and utter stupidity.


#20

Amen.

Well put.

GG


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.