PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Website Operator Banned from the ‘Revenge Porn’ Business After FTC Charges He Unfairly Posted Nude Photos (UPDATED with statement by domain owner)

Posted on January 30, 2015June 30, 2025 by Dissent

From the FTC:

The operator of an alleged “revenge porn” website is banned from publicly sharing any more nude videos or photographs of people without their affirmative express consent, under a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission. In addition, he will have to destroy the intimate images and personal contact information he collected while operating the site.

The FTC’s complaint against Craig Brittain alleges that he used deception to acquire and post intimate images of women, then referred them to another website he controlled, where they were told they could have the pictures removed if they paid hundreds of dollars.

“This behavior is not only illegal but reprehensible,” said Jessica Rich, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “I am pleased that as a result of this settlement, the illegally collected images and information will be deleted, and this individual can never return to the so-called ‘revenge porn’ business.”

According to the FTC’s complaint, Brittain acquired the images in a number of ways, such as by posing as a woman on the advertising site Craigslist, and offering nude photos purportedly of himself in exchange for photos provided by women. When women provided him with the photos, Brittain posted them on his site without their knowledge or permission.

In addition to collecting and posting the images himself, Brittain solicited viewers of his site to anonymously submit nude photos of people to his site, according to the complaint. He required submissions to include sensitive personal information about the people in the photos, including their full name, town and state, phone number and Facebook profile.

The complaint also alleged that Brittain offered a “bounty system” on his site, wherein users could offer a reward of at least $100 in exchange for other users finding pictures and information about a specific person. Overall, Brittain’s site included photos of more than 1,000 individuals, according to the complaint.

Women whose photographs and information were posted on the site contacted Brittain to have the information removed, citing the potential harms to their careers and reputations. In addition, women cited unwelcome contact from strangers who had discovered their information on Brittain’s site. The complaint notes that in many cases Brittain did not respond to the women’s requests to remove the information.

In fact, the complaint alleges that Brittain’s site advertised content removal services under the name “Takedown Hammer” and “Takedown Lawyer” that could delete consumers’ images and content from the site in exchange for a payment of $200 to $500. Despite presenting these as third-party services, the complaint alleges that the sites for these services were owned and operated by Brittain.

Under the terms of the settlement, Brittain is required to permanently delete all of the images and other personal information he received during the time he operated the site. He will also be prohibited from publicly sharing intimate videos or photographs of people without their affirmative express consent, as well as being prohibited from misrepresenting how he will use any personal information he collects online.

The Commission vote to accept the the proposed consent order for public comment was 5-0. The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through March 2, 2015, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit comments electronically by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section.

Update: In response to FTC’s press release, Craig Brittain posted a lengthy statement on isanybodydown.com. Following an apology, he points out where he thinks the FTC’s statement (and media reports) were inaccurate or misleading. Here are just two of his points, below, but you should read the whole thing before further repeating the FTC’s claims:

The FTC did not ‘shut down’ Is Anybody Down, it was closed in April 2013. The FTC agreement is to NOT REOPEN IAD, not to close it down (You can’t re-close a site that’s been closed for almost two years, after all). I retain ownership of the IAD domain (and may do with it what I like, as long as it’s not “Revenge Porn”/”personal information”, etc.). The mainstream media willfully refused to print and properly update the fact that the website was permanently closed in April 2013, instead deciding to decry my use of a domain previously associated with the website. I would like to use the domain to support an anti-“Revenge Porn” movement.

[…]

At no point in time were physical addresses ever posted on the website. Please stop repeating this egregious lie unless there is absolute proof of a physical address being posted (there isn’t, because it never happened).

Related posts:

  • Tell the FTC: Craig Brittain Should Not Get a Slap on the Wrist for his Revenge Porn Site
Category: BreachesBusinessFeatured NewsGovtOnline

Post navigation

← AU: Journalists should be shielded from phone and web snooping, union says
Illinois’ Newly Amended Eavesdropping Statute Poses Challenges for Employers →

Search

Contact Me

Email: info[at]pogowasright.org
Security Issue: security[at]pogowasright.org
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]pogowasright.org

Research Report of Note

A report by EPIC.org:

State Attorneys General & Privacy: Enforcement Trends, 2020-2024

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Always watching: How ICE’s plan to monitor social media 24/7 threatens privacy and civic participation
  • Who’s watching the watchers? This Mozilla fellow, and her Surveillance Watch map
  • EPIC Publishes New Whitepaper Detailing Privacy Risks of Government Data Mining Programs
  • Modern cars are spying on you. Here’s what you can do about it.
  • Attorney General James and Multistate Coalition Secure $5.1 Million from Education Software Company for Failing to Protect Students’ Data       
  • EU Parliament committee votes to advance controversial Europol data sharing proposal
  • DHS offers “disturbing new excuses” to seize kids’ biometric data, expert says

RSS Recent Posts at DataBreaches.net

  • Manassas City Public Schools close on Monday due to cyberattack
  • San Joaquin County Superior Court concludes sensitive info leaked in data breach
  • NCCIA arrests man over massive data breach involving millions of Pakistanis
  • Defense Contractors Are Silencing Their Cybersecurity Watchdogs
  • Fourth Circuit Weighs in on Standing in Data Breach Class Actions
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.