Seizing on a moral argument for the site's creation the homepage claims: 'All our offenders have been reported by local community members who feel these offenders should be taught a lesson before their actions escalate.' Tarnished: User information is not fact-checked by the site who says it is protected from libel under Section 230 of the law, so anyone could find themselves listed and would have to pay 0 to have their profile removed Jezebel noted in concern: 'It treats sex workers as if they were sex offenders - the site literally calls them "offenders." And New York Magazine called it the 'Worst Website Ever' on its Intelligencer page.
But says the site on its FAQ page, suing will come to nothing as the publishers of the site are protected by the Communications Deceny Act, Section 230 - a law that implicates the source of the information as the criminal in online accusations, and not the provider.
Tracy, a stunning 22-year-old student based in the U.
K., reveals to Daily Mail Online: 'One particular guy, a married man, requested I meet him in the U.
There's reason to question whether the content is actually user-submitted, or whether the purveyors put it in themselves, when a brand-new site appears already populated with content.''Moreover, Section 230 is not a defense to criminal charges.
Extortion is a crime in many states, and a federal crime to the extent it uses interstate communication.
Indeed, she once dated a client for less than a month, never slept with him, and yet still managed to score two new pairs of Christian Louboutin shoes worth $2,500.'Sugar daddies don't want prostitutes,' she says.