Don't Date Him Girl Lawsuit Dismissed

(Online Dating Industry Journal) A lawsuit filed last year against the controversial Don't Date Him Girl Website has been dismissed. The lawsuit, filed by Todd Hollis, a lawyer, was for defamation for Don't Date Him Girl allowing a poster to "anonymously" post lies about him, something the site has been accused of quite a bit. Don't Date Him Girl has posted pictures, names, addresses, and other information of men who women post about. Don't Date Him Girl allows women to post warnings about men they've dating, including personally identifying information. They allow posts to be made "anonymously" although they claim that users have to provide personal identifying information to them before posting anonymously.

Don't Date Him Girl was formed by a former journalist, Tasha Joseph, who launched the site a few years ago and successfully courted major media publicity.

According to Judge R. Stanton Wettick, the "Defendant’s Web site is accessible to anyone connected to the Internet anywhere in the world. Under plaintiff’s argument, defendant could be hauled into court in any state for any controversy. This result would be inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s understanding of the requirements of due process."

The judge was referring to the lawsuit being filed in the wrong venue. Since Don't Date Him Girl resides in Florida, the lawsuit should have been filed in Florida, according to the judge. The suit had been filed in Pennsylvania. This leaves a potential option for Hollis to once again go after Don't Date Him Girl.

The lawsuit defendants received the support of the ACLU, which routinely takes on controversial cases surrounding the issue of "free speech". Don't Date Him Girl has been a source of continual controversy, some of which you can read in an Online Dating Magazine Inside the Industry column titled Reputation Management Systems like Don't Date Him Girl Have Several Flaws to Work Out.

Hollis originally filed the lawsuit in June of last year, claiming that his reputation had been ruined by laws posted on Don't Date Him Girl that the site refused to remove. Some of the lies he says were posted was that he had herpes, gave a girl an STD, is gay/bisexual, and has multiple children.

In analyzing the 14th Amendment, the judge concluded:

"In the present case, the Joseph Defendants do not perform a significant amount of commercial business over the Internet. thus the website is insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction."

The Online Dating Industry Journal has left a message with Hollis for comment.

Joe's Comments
The whole venue issue is too bad. Many believed that the lawsuit was a longshot to begin with, but I applaud Hollis for moving forward with it. The thought that any Website can promote hate-filled vile messages presented as fact, but potentially rooted in rumor or lies, is not good. Joseph has been consistently saying that she is protected under a law that protects Internet Service Providers. Yet what she doesn't realize is that she isn't an Internet Service Provider. She is a Website hosted by an Internet Service Provider. A Website doesn't qualify as an Internet Service Provider.

I hope Hollis moves forward with filing the lawsuit in Florida. Joseph, who I once appeared with on Fox News needs to be held accountable for her actions in promoting and participating in a process that is ripe for defamation.

Comments

[Cindy English]

This really cannot be considered a "victory" as many of the women supporters of DDHG see it because the battle was never fought! The judge simply did not "address" the issue because it was filed in the wrong venue.

Seems to me that if Mr. Hollis is as self assured, arrogant and angry as he appeared on the Dr. Phil Show, he will most certainly file a new lawsuit against DDHG in the Sunshine State!

I really don't think he can win though.

[Smitty]

So why is it ok that guys have websites where they can publish pictures of their ex-girlfriends naked to get back at them? It's a two way street and as far as I am concerned, what goes around, comes around.

[Smitty]

Here are some examples....and you "guys" out there are going to tell me that this is mature and acceptable? Yeah right!

http://www.exgfpics.com/blog/

http://www.expic.net/

The radio station in my city even did a rant on this kind of stuff and frankly, the pictures are more degrading than a few comments.

[Jimmy]

Cindy English, Smitty,

There is a major flaw in comparing anonymous posting sites like "www.dontdatehimgirl.com" to other sites like "www.exgfpics.com": responsibility and the ability to seek some recourse. The point of the defamation lawsuit brought by Mr. Hollis is that Ms. Joseph, through her site, is facillitating inaccuracies and lies about him and he has no other recourse to clearing his name but to sue her. Allegedly, the comments being posted about Mr. Hollis anonymously are inaccurate and/or flat out lies. It's just a person, whether man or woman, who is trying to smear his reputation. Indeed, it isn't necessarily even an ex-girlfriend who is doing the actual posting; that is an assumption that you are making. It could be, for example, that Mr. Hollis is up for a promotion against another co-worker. This other co-worker decides to submarine Mr. Hollis by smearing his reputation through an anonymous posting on a site like DDHG so as to present him in a bad light to the company and secure the promotion for himself. Mr. Hollis now has no recourse except against Ms. Joseph because the posting was anonymous. Is that right?

Whereas, on a site like exgfpics, presumable the person in a picture made a choice to have their picture taken naked and then allowed her boyfriend to keep the picture at that time. Certainly, she doesn't want them posted once she breaks up and, the ex-boyfriend should not be posting the pics. However, unlike a posting on DDHG, there is a certain degree of responsibility on her part for taking the pictures to begin with and letting her boyfriend keep the pics afterwards. That isn't the case in false statements being posted on DDHG. Also, presumably, with respect to the pictures being taken, the girl knows which ex-boyfriend took the pictures and who posted them so she has some recourse there. The problem with DDHG is the anonomity associted with the posting. A guy like Mr. Hollis has no recourse against the individual who made the posting to begin with.

You are making an assumption that everything posted on anonymous posting sites like DDHG is accurate. That is simply is not true. Mr. Hollis should have some recourse to clear his name if the stuff up there isn't true.

[Expic]

I am the person that started expic.net and believe you are both right on all accounts. Its hard to be a person that believes in freedom of speech, then turn to something that we may find offensive and ask that it be removed. The posting of information on our site is the direct result of a girl gifting a picture to her boyfriend. Once this has been done, it is at his discretion if he wants to post the pictures on a website or any other media. This same game has been done long before the internet. Guys used to take naked pictures of their girlfriends and wifes and have them developed at the local saveon drug store. If he wanted to share these pictues, he would either make more copies, or simply burn a few on a copy machine. Times have changed and the internet have given us the ability to redistribute the information in a much more efficient way. As a responsible site owner, any requests we get for picture removal are taken seriously and acted on accordingly. This is a major difference in the "ex girlfriend posting" versus DDHD. We moderate every post and remove any thing that may be identifiable to whom the girl in the picture is.

When it all comes down to it, i started the site solely for a way to generate revenue from advertising. I like naked women, and most other men do as well.

Be careful ladies, you never know what is going to be posted!

Cheers - expic.net

[taye]

everybody deserves a tru heads up

[Chris]

LOL, I just visted the expic.net website. I was curious about the comment "We morderate every post and remove anything that maybe identifiable to whom the girl in the picture is" well you don't remove their faces. Nothing is more identifiable than one's face.

[photomuse]

I'm amazed at what capabilities that "Don't Date Him Girl" can do. I had placed a factual comment on the website that was very simple about someone, and was hoping that it would at least prevent another girl from getting hurt. Months later, the man that was written about, found the post, and posted his comments, which were not very nice. I was willing to take the comments off, but the site took away my membership privileges or someone had taken my identity on the site.

Anyway, after numerous emails to contact them, I had hoped that they would assist in removing the information so I would no longer receive threats to my life and my children's lives, but they do not return emails.

I wish the site would be closed down just for the purpose of safety.

[NANCY REGAN]

I AGREE WITH THE LAST COMMENT. I TOO WAS CONVENIENTLY REMOVED THEREFORE UNABLE TO ACCESS, EDIT, REMOVE MY POST OR COMMENTS. THIS SITE SUCKS. I ALSO MADE NUMBEROUS ATTEMPTS AT CONTACTING THEM, OVER 100 TIMES TO NO AVAIL. AS A MEMBER YOU WOULD THINK I AT LEAST DESERVED A REASON AS TO WHY THEY NO LONGER ALLOWED ME TO GO ON TO THE SITE. ITS A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS WHEN YOU SIGN UP FOR SOMETHING, POST THINGS ONLY TO BRING THEM $$$$$ AND THE PRICE YOU PAY IS YOUR FEELINGS, THOUGHTS, PAIN ETC IT NOW OWNED BY THEM. I WISH WITH EVERYTHING I AM THAT THAT SITE BE SHUT DOWN AND THE OWNER BE SUED FOR MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF WHICH SHE NEVER RECOVERS A BULLSHIT SITE TO SAY THE LEAST!!!!!!

[Shannon]

I agree with the guy who owns www.expic.net, in that concerns or complains need to be heard. If a site does allow members to post what they believe to be factual comments or events about another person, the site can not be held liable and should not be held liable. If that is the case we will have to shut the internet down as a whole. My Space members post comments and blogs about others all the time. Also, the whole BLOG world is about opinions and freedom of speech. A site should consider the complaints and investigate them, and decide whether or not the member should be removed from their membership base. If the person is removed, perhaps all of their postings should be removed as well. Bottom line is, a credit report, criminal back ground report, etc are NEVER 100% accurate. They can apply whatever they want to your file. YOU have to dispute and have erroneous information removed. Same applies here. Stop the madness. Papparazi is everywhere and celebrities can't stop them. Can't sue them, can't run them over with their cars (Britney Spears). So grow up and start keeping it REAL!

[Katie C.]

I just found out I am on that site- tonight. I am a GIRL! This is so silly- it is all lies, and the worst part is that people from my town saw it - and it says that I have herpes...? This is really awful, and not true. Even if I did have herpes, it would be awful for someone to post about it without my permission on a venue such as this. Something has to be done about this site.