Skip to main content

Skanks in NYC blogger sues Google for $15 million

Rosemary Port, the author of a gossip blog known as "Skanks In NYC" is suing the internet search mogul Google for revealing her name in a lawsuit against model Liskula Cohen, who claimed that Port defamed her name in an online smear campaign.

The lawsuit was first filed by Cohen back in January, regarding some posts that mainly occurred in August of 2008 where Port referred to Cohen as a "hag," "psychotic" and a "skank."

The 37-year-old model filed a defamation in the form of a libel and intentional emotional distress' suit, claiming Port had written derogatory comments about her in the Skanks In NYC blog.

Last week a judge ordered Google to give up the name of the anonymous blogger behind the Skanks website.

"When I was being defended by attorneys for Google, I thought my right to privacy was being protected," 29-year-old Port told The New York Daily News on Sunday. "But that fell right through the cracks. Without any warning, I was put on a silver platter for the press to attack me. I would think that a multi-billion dollar conglomerate would protect the rights of all its users."

Port also claims that Cohen defamed herself.

"By going to the press, she defamed herself. Before her suit, there were probably two hits on my website: one from me looking at it and one from her looking at it," Port said. "That was before it became a spectacle. I feel my right to privacy has been violated."

In her suit, she'll charge Google "breached its fiduciary duty to protect her expectation of anonymity," said her high-powered attorney Salvatore Strazzullo.

"I'm ready to take this all the way to the Supreme Court," Strazzullo said. "Our Founding Fathers wrote 'The Federalist Papers' under pseudonyms. Inherent in the First Amendment is the right to speak anonymously. Shouldn't that right extend to the new public square of the Internet?"

"I feel proud to live in a country where you're not persecuted for your opinions," Port said. "That right has to be protected.

"Even though people are now taking shots at me on the Web, I believe those people have a right to their opinions - and their anonymity," said Port, who is slated to appear on ABC's Good Morning America tomorrow.

 

Comments

  • wow 5 years ago

    that is scarey stuff! wonder what other things google has turned over.

  • Indoloro 5 years ago

    I approve of her viewpoint but suing Google for $15 mil? Now she's just being greedy. Wasn't Google ordered by a court to give the info out? She shouldn't be stealing their money just to prove a point.

  • Dude 5 years ago

    Indoro, if you were to sue a big conglomerate, what will you sue them for? $10 and pack of Gum? The Point of suing for large amounts of money is so that the company that's being sued FEELS punished in some way. Google won't even notice if they lose a couple hundred bucks, but 15mil is another story.

  • Indoloro 5 years ago

    Dude, my name's right on the page and you still can't spell it? I'm not suggesting she sue them for $20, I'm suggesting she tries to do something other than filing a lawsuit like every other redneck in Murika. Google was ordered by a court to give out the information, why the hell is she suing then for that?

  • Michael Roberts of Rexxfield.com 5 years ago

    In many cases horrible problems have been avoided for the community as a result of anonymous blogging. This includes whistleblowing for white-collar criminals, community awareness when sexual predators move into the neighborhood, and many other alerts that are of great community benefit.

    Benefits notwithstanding, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs and anonymous free speech on the Internet is one such omlette. There is no such thing as free speech, there is always a cost. Sometimes that cost is acceptable, moreover desirable, particularly in the case of positive community awareness. But often their many false and deceptive rumors, and libelous attacks are motivated only by hatred and vindictive antisocial promptings. More often than not, these serial cyber defamers have some type of antisocial personality disorder. They have nothing better to do than hurt other people, in fact they are actually fueled by other people's pain. Normal people like 97% of the readers of my c

  • Michael Roberts of Rexxfield.com 5 years ago

    continued...
    Normal people like 97% of the readers of my comment cannot begin to relate to how these people think. Stop for a moment and imagine not having a conscience..... is simply impossible.

    A concerted, focused and malicious Internet smear campaign can be as devastating for a person that relies on his or her reputation for employment as a fire can be for a farmer who loses his fields, barns, and livestock.

    Respectfully submitted by Michael Roberts. Internet Libel Victim's Advocate.
    www.Rexxfield.com

  • Anonymous 5 years ago

    Michael - how is it libel? They have pictures of the skank being skanky. Libel is only libel if it's not true.

  • Anon 5 years ago

    a skank is a skank

  • haha 5 years ago

    Have you seen the pictures of the chick being skanky? They're great.