Revenge Porn Scumbags Spanked With $385,000 Judgment

Kevin Bollaert

Kevin Bollaert

Founders of the revenge porn site You Got Posted, Eric Chanson and Kevin Bollaert, have been ordered to pay an Ohio woman $385,000, including $75,000 in punitive damages, for distributing child pornography – photos of her when she was underage. (judgment) The plaintiff, represented by Randazza Legal Group, sued You Got Posted’s operators after finding several sexually explicit images of herself as a minor on the site. The $385,000 judgment is the end of her case against two of You Got Posted’s operators.

The woman sued as “Jane Doe,” and the federal court for the Southern District of Ohio awarded her a judgment of $385,000 against Kevin Bollaert and Eric Chanson on March 18, 2014. The Court awarded the plaintiff $150,000 each on two child pornography claims, and $10,000 on her right of publicity claim. Additionally, the Court awarded the plaintiff $75,000 in punitive damages based on Bollaert and Chanson’s conduct. In total, the Court awarded $385,000 against Kevin Bollaert and Eric Chanson. Additionally, the Court prohibited Kevin Bollaert and Eric Chanson from ever again publishing her images.

In May of 2013, the plaintiff sued Kevin Bollaert Eric Chanson, and other defendants for publishing sexually explicit images of her on the website You Got Posted. In related legal action, on December 10, 2013, the California Attorney General’s Office indicted and arrested Bollaert on counts of conspiracy, identity theft, and extortion in connection with You Got Posted. (Arrest Warrant Here)

The judgment comes on a default. But, it was not an ordinary default. The Chanson defendants retained the services of a law firm in India to defend them — yes, a law firm that doesn’t even have a single license required for this litigation, much less the court where this matter was pending. They tried to pretend that they were actually pro se, while using these unlicensed “attorneys” as their counsel. When we figured that out, we moved to strike all of their pleadings. (Motion here). The court granted the motion. (order) Eric Chanson didn’t bother trying again and after a prove-up hearing he and his compatriot got their just desserts.

The message this $385,000 judgment sends to people who run revenge porn sites is unambiguous. These sites irreparably harm their victims, and often without any criminal action against them. In this case, a civil suit allowed our client to obtain justice against the people who exploited her. Marc J. Randazza of the Randazza Legal Group and Prominent First Amendment Bad Ass, H. Louis Sirkin handled the case on behalf of Jane Doe.

30 Responses to Revenge Porn Scumbags Spanked With $385,000 Judgment

  1. CPlatt says:

    Congratulations Marc. No more needs to be said.

  2. PuaHate says:

    Would the fine have been so big if the pics weren’t underage?

  3. Chad says:

    Yay for the good guys!

  4. Steve P says:

    What’s the likelihood of her actually getting the money? Assuming they have assets to take.

  5. […] profile in the process, well, can’t be helped.  Except, it’s nonsense, as shown by the $385,000 judgment obtained by Marc Randazza against revenge porn site You Got Posted, Eric Chanson and Kevin […]

  6. dan says:

    how did you figure out the pleadings were coming from a firm in India? I suspect there’s a story in that one.

  7. Lalaland says:

    Top job Marc! Here’s hoping the chilling effect does it’s job here. I would also be fascinated to hear the story of how you worked out the attorney was from India. That they left his notes to them in their filing shows precisely how much wit these exploiters of naive women have.

  8. Steve P says:

    Also too, isn’t it good that some scummy bastards like that’ve been held to account.

  9. Congratulations on your victory Marc! I hope civil awards of this magnitude will have a deterrent effect on future would-be revenge porn d-bags.

    I feel for the victims of these idiots. The stories of teenage girls killing themselves over their pics/videos being distributed is distressful.

  10. andrews says:

    a civil suit allowed our client to obtain justice against the people who exploited her.

    Not so sure about that. I am thinking that if you hold your breath until you actually collect, you might turn blue.

  11. […] who referred to the defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, said the judgment should put the operators of revenge porn sites on […]

  12. […] who referred to the defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, said the judgment should put the operators of revenge porn sites on […]

  13. […] who referred to the defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, said the judgment should put the operators of revenge porn sites on […]

  14. […] who referred to the defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, said the judgment should put the operators of revenge porn sites on […]

  15. […] who referred to the defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, said the judgment should put the operators of revenge porn sites on […]

  16. […] who referred to the defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, said the judgment should put the operators of revenge porn sites on […]

  17. […] who referred to the defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, said the judgment should put the operators of revenge porn sites on […]

  18. […] related: Revenge Porn Scumbags Spanked With $385,000 Judgment (The Legal Satyricon / […]

  19. […] related: Revenge Porn Scumbags Spanked With $385,000 Judgment (The Legal Satyricon / […]

  20. […] who referred to the defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, said the judgment should put the operators of revenge porn sites on […]

  21. […] borrow the term scumbag from the plaintiff's attorney, Marc Randazza, who's in the habit of referring to the defendants as such (and also has the wit to credit the others who handled her case in this delightful manner: Malcolm […]

  22. […] the term scumbag from the plaintiff’s attorney, Marc Randazza, who’s in the habit of referring to the defendants as such (and also has the wit to credit the others who handled her case in this delightful manner: Malcolm […]

  23. […] the term scumbag from the plaintiff’s attorney, Marc Randazza, who’s in the habit of referring to the defendants as such (and also has the wit to credit the others who handled her case in this delightful manner: Malcolm […]

  24. […] who referred to a defendants as “scumbags” in a blog post Tuesday, pronounced a visualisation should put a operators of punish porn sites on […]

  25. […] another recent Randazza post about judgment against revenge porn operators. So I guess 230 didn’t protect them? Is it just because it was child porn? […]

  26. […] Marc Randazza, First Amendment lawyer extraordinaire and someone who just got a $350,000 judgment against a revenge porn site operator says, there is no greater incentive to stop revenge porn than a civil damages law that would allow […]

  27. […] illegali. Denari che non sapranno compensare la giovane dall’umiliazione subita ma che, secondo il suo avvocato, apriranno la strada ad una mobilitazione delle vittime, che potranno contare sul sistema […]

  28. NotPiffany says:

    Why on earth would they have gone to a law firm in India? How could they possibly have thought that a foreign firm with no license in the US would be able to give them appropriate counsel?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,710 other followers

%d bloggers like this: