MR

Celebrities get impersonated on the web. They’re famous — everyone is anonymous — it happens. Most celebrities just ignore it; but some get pissed off. Kanye West got mad as hell about Twitter users pretending to be him last week. This week it’s Aerosmith lead singer Steven Tyler who is up in arms — to the point of actually taking anonymous bloggers to court.

Tyler attempted to sue a group of bloggers that he says were impersonating him, sharing private facts, making false statements even using his likeness on the web, NBC Los Angeles reports. The only problem? The whole “anonymous” thing. Seeing as no one really knows who these bloggers are, they naturally didn’t bother showing up to court. Hell, I’m quite certain they didn’t even know they were supposed to be in court. So the judge dismissed the case.

Tyler is apparently most upset about these anonymous bloggers posting some comments about his mother who passed away last year. I wasn’t able to find those, but I did find a robust web community around “Fake Steven Tyler.” There’s a popular one in the Rock Band Forums, a group on Facebook (also based around his Rock Band avatar), there’s even a Wikipedia page and an odd YouTube video.

Twitter took down the fake Kanye West accounts at his request, but it’s hard to see what Tyler or a court could do in this case. A good first step would be to figure out who you’re actually suing though.

"Yes, your Honor... I would like to sue the Internets for defamation of my character. I found the bullshit written about me in Exhibit A on the Googles."

LOL!

Voyager wrote:"Yes, your Honor... I would like to sue the Internets for defamation of my character. I found the bullshit written about me in Exhibit A on the Googles."

I cannot stop giggling at this and it's funnier each time I read it.

If you could sue people for this shit, Fro and Friga would be rich.

Voyager wrote:If you could sue people for this shit, Fro and Friga would be rich.

Be careful with what you type here,,,, Fro's attorney might be lurking around lookin for Xzibit A

Behshad wrote:

Voyager wrote:If you could sue people for this shit, Fro and Friga would be rich.

Be careful with what you type here,,,, Fro's attorney might be lurking around lookin for Xzibit A

I got your Xzibit A right here, bro.

Voyager wrote:If you could sue people for this shit, Fro and Friga would be rich.

In related insanity...

http://omg.yahoo.com/news/ashton-demi-to-break-up-with-twitter/23002?nc

LOS ANGELES, Calif. -- News of a Twitter reality series is not sitting well with two of the micro-blogging Web site's most famous users -- Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore.

"I hope this isn't true," Demi wrote in response to the planned Twitter series, announced over Memorial Day weekend. "If it is, our Twitter time may come to a quick and sad end!"

Demi's husband, Ashton -- the undisputed Twitter king with 2 million followers -- was equally disturbed by the idea of a TV series. "Wow I hope this isn't true," he wrote on his Twitter account. "I really don't like being sold out. May have to take a twitter hiatus."

He noted that the planned show could create a safety concern for celebrities who Twitter.

"I don't want to be stalked!!!" Kutcher continued. "It's all fun and games until somebody gets stalked."


HUH?? Is he kidding?

Ashton... dude... c'mere. *throttles Ashton for 15 minutes* You opened yourself up to Twitter! You created your account, CHOSE for it to be out there, and were recently bragging about having 2 million people following you!! You don't want to be stalked but you DO want to tell 2 million anonymous people what you're doing all the time?

Create a safety concern for celebrities who Twitter?
These celebs are choosing to put themselves out there. No one is making them send tweets.

First the anonymous bloggers, now the tweeters... next?!

I'm sure Tyler would like to stomp on the cockroaches...only problem is where they are! He can turn on the lights to make them run though.

Kanye West = Douche.
Somebody should sue him for being born.
Hate that guy.

So what was Tyler smoking to go to court against people who he didn't even know their names??? And as for Ashton and Demi, hell, they are just inviting "Loons" What do they expect when they share everything on Twitter?

Laydee wrote:So what was Tyler smoking to go to court against people who he didn't even know their names??? And as for Ashton and Demi, hell, they are just inviting "Loons" What do they expect when they share everything on Twitter?

They are jealous of Perry and they want their own loons... 2,000,000 of them... and they don't want anyone else exploiting their loons exept for them.

Heck, I wouldn't advise anyone to tell their daily routine online anymore...let alone detailed plans!

Voyager wrote:

Laydee wrote:So what was Tyler smoking to go to court against people who he didn't even know their names??? And as for Ashton and Demi, hell, they are just inviting "Loons" What do they expect when they share everything on Twitter?

They are jealous of Perry and they want their own loons... 2,000,000 of them... and they don't want anyone else exploiting their loons exept for them.

I'm going to see Aerosmith with 3 Doors Down on the first show of their tour in Saint Louis on June 10. I wasn't going to go because I've seen them several times, but I figured what the hell - the lawn tickets are only $20, and 3 Doors Down is worth paying that much for.

Even though they're older now, Aerosmith Rocks and always will.

I had the pleasure of seeing Aerosmith years ago, they were touring with Damn Yankees. They put on an amazing show.

Voyager wrote:If you could sue people for this shit, Fro and Friga would be rich.

Slander is very sue'able in all courts of law. As long as there is a digital footprint, it's doable.

We'll have to see how the case with Tim Sholtz goes. Calling a person a dick or asshole isn't slander. Has anyone here really told an untruth about the band that could be construed as a fact?

Neal pretty much acknowledged the lipsynicing in the GQ interview so that one won't fly (Just half-admitting that shit probably knocked the band's HOF chances down even further).

Ridiculing the band, while many may consider it tasteless, isn't grounds for a lawsuit.

texafana wrote:

Voyager wrote:If you could sue people for this shit, Fro and Friga would be rich.

Slander is very sue'able in all courts of law. As long as there is a digital footprint, it's doable.

Under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1964 Case, New York Times v Sullivan, where a public figure attempts to bring an action for defamation, the public figure must prove an additional element: That the statement was made with "actual malice". In translation, that means that the person making the statement knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth. For example, Ariel Sharon sued Time Magazine over allegations of his conduct relating to the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Although the jury concluded that the Time story included false allegations, they found that Time had not acted with "actual malice" and did not award any damages.

Why Commencing A Defamation Action Is Not Aways A Good Idea
While people who are targeted by lies may well be angry enough to file a lawsuit, there are some very good reasons why actions for defamation may not be a good idea.

The publicity that results from a defamation lawsuit can create a greater audience for the false statements than they previously enjoyed. For example, if a newspaper or news show picks up the story of the lawsuit, false accusations that were previously known to only a small number of people may suddenly become known to the entire community, nation, or even to the world. As the media is much more apt to cover a lawsuit than to cover its ultimate resolution, the net effect may be that large numbers of people hear the false allegations, but never learn how the litigation was resolved.

Another big issue is that defamation cases tend to be difficult to win, and damage awards tend to be small. As a result, it is unusual for attorneys to be willing to take defamation cases on a contingent fee basis, and the fees expended in litigating even a successful defamation action can exceed the total recovery.

Another significant concern is that, even where the statements made by the defendant are entirely false, it may not be possible for a plaintiff to prove all of the elements of defamation. Most people will respond to news that a plaintiff lost a defamation lawsuit by concluding that the allegations were true.

In other words, the plaintiff in a defamation action may be required to expend a considerable amount of money to bring the action, may experience significant negative publicity which repeats the false accusations, and if unsuccessful in the litigation may cement into the public consciousness the belief that the defamatory accusations were true. While many plaintiffs will be able to successfully prosecute defamation actions, the possible downside should be considered when deciding whether or not such litigation should be attempted.

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/person ... ation.html

Gunbot wrote:We'll have to see how the case with Tim Sholtz goes. Calling a person a dick or asshole isn't slander. Has anyone here really told an untruth about the band that could be construed as a fact?

Neal pretty much acknowledged the lipsynicing in the GQ interview so that one won't fly ([b]Just half-admitting that shit probably knocked the band's HOF chances down even further[/b]).

Ridiculing the band, while many may consider it tasteless, isn't grounds for a lawsuit.

I think just doing it knocked their chances (if there even was one)

Imposters can be nasty IMO. If I'm still a Steve Perry fan it's in spite of some of his other fans/fansites. There seemed to be someone in chat that was interesting and I thought this person was a guy...others there pretended it was SP. Didn't need to much of a reality check myself...SP lives in CA...he doesn't need to be trolling chatrooms looking for women, does he?

BTW, the only game I played on a SP site was...SP stands for "special person", "slightly persuasive", etc. Someone else said SP stands for "super potato". That game may be a bit saccharin but harmless.

[/i]