Monday, January 29, 2007

Julie Amero, Porn, and the Danger of Disney

"I ask this rhetorical question: Where does objectionable material come from - a site like Disney.com or the pornographic dot coms? Where do abusive JavaScript and Web Attacker kits reside?" - Detective Lounsbury, as reported at Network Performance Daily
It is predictably sad that Detective Lounsbury, the prosecutor, the defending attorney, the jury, the superintendent, and just about everyone involved in this case has no idea what they don't know. That's right. Unless they've been reading our content, they still don't know what they don't know.

Let's talk about it.

In a research project called Strider, Microsoft discovered this;
The Microsoft researchers found that Web sites aimed at kids were a regular target. Several variations of Disney Channel's "kimpossible.com" have been registered and all redirect to a parked anchor for the misspelled "disnryland.com." On that site, Google AdSense ads for adult content and pornography are being served.

The data from the Strider Typo-Patrol System also highlighted the use of typo-squatting in phishing attacks. Web sites belonging to Bank of America Corp., Barclays Bank PLC., Citigroup Inc. have all been targeted, with misspelled variations of domains pointing to fake banking sites with Google ads tailored to financial services.

Not only was Lounsbury wrong, he was LOUD wrong. But that's just the tip of a prosecution morals racket that puts every American at risk. That's right, when any jury in this country is shown the graphic content found on the accused's computer they are sickened. And rightly so. But what they don't realize is that their home computer may contain the same stuff. In fact the judge, jury, lawyers, reporters, and townsfolk may have that and worse.

Let's talk about "Bring Your Kids to Work Day". Lots of companies encourage this. They let little Dick and Jane sit at the company computers and surf. And the kids do. They spell and misspell all kinds of sites they love including Disney.

So what?

Read this testimonial from a private investigator endorsing ComputerCop Pro;
"My most recent case two weeks ago involved a publicly held corporation and $100 million. I was given search criteria by the client and uncovered hundreds of erased files including emails. As a result of the investigation, the CEO/president of the company was fired."
Wow!

Let's think about this. You or me, a teacher, priest, CEO, anybody can have their computer scanned and be prosecuted or fired or humiliated because their child visited Disney but typed it wrong!

You see, Julie Amero is no more responsible for what happened on an unprotected school computer than you or I are on our protected ones. Now that we all know this, there is no need for Det. Lounsbury to insist beyond credibility that Julie was porn surfing, or that the attorneys had a clue what the state of the computer was, or that the judge could smell the stench of the prosecutor's claims.

This is a mistrial and a tragic miscarriage of Justice. Everyone needs to admit it sooner than later.

Digg It! | Add to Del.icio.us | Add to Technorati

No comments:

Cartoons (click to site of ownership):