The social-networking site Jerk.com secretly took information from Facebook to label millions “a jerk” and “not a jerk,” the Federal Trade Commission said Monday.
FTC is seeking an order to stop Jerk.com from using improperly obtained personal information and to require the website to delete the information. An administrative judge will hear the case next January.
In what FTC called a “brazen attempt to exploit” peoples’ concerns about their online reputation, the consumer-protection agency charged Jerk.com and its operator, Napster cofounder John Fanning, with deceiving more than 73 million consumers.
Between 2009 and 2013, the FTC says, millions of Americans searched themselves on search engines to find out that they had been labeled either a “Jerk” or “not a jerk” on Jerk.com. Adding insult to injury, the website told consumers that they would have to pay a fee to revise their profile.
Visitors to the site believed that that their profiles were made by other users, but most profiles were actually created from information harvested surreptitiously from Facebook, according to the FTC.
Additionally, the agency said that the site told consumers that they could pay $30 to amend their profile or $25 to contact customer service, but those who did shell out money “received nothing” in exchange for their payment.
Profiles included photos and detailed personal information, including name, address, contact information, and even Social Security numbers in some cases.
Jerk.com also let users vote on whether or not a person was a jerk and allowed for personal comments on user profiles. Comments were generally unkind, such as, “Omg I hate this kid he’s such a loser,” and, “Nobody in their right mind would love you “¦ not even your parents love [you].”
What We're Following See More »
"Even if House Republicans manage to get enough members of their party on board with the latest version of their health care bill, they will face another battle in the Senate: whether the bill complies with the chamber’s arcane ... Byrd rule, which stipulates all provisions in a reconciliation bill must affect federal spending and revenues in a way that is not merely incidental." Democrats should have the advantage in that fight, "unless the Senate pulls another 'nuclear option.'”
The House has passed a one-week spending bill that will avert a government shutdown which was set to begin at midnight. Lawmakers now have an extra week to come to a longer agreement which is expected to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year in September. The legislation now goes to the Senate, where it is expected to pass before President Trump signs it.
President Trump’s portrayal of an effort to funnel more Medicaid dollars to Puerto Rico as a "bailout" is complicating negotiations over a continuing resolution on the budget. "House Democrats are now requiring such assistance as a condition for supporting the continuing resolution," a position that the GOP leadership is amenable to. "But Mr. Trump’s apparent skepticism aligns him with conservative House Republicans inclined to view its request as a bailout, leaving the deal a narrow path to passage in Congress."
Democrats in the House are threatening to shut down the government if Republicans expedite a vote on a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, said Democratic House Whip Steny Hoyer Thursday. Lawmakers have introduced a one-week spending bill to give themselves an extra week to reach a long-term funding deal, which seemed poised to pass easily. However, the White House is pressuring House Republicans to take a vote on their Obamacare replacement Friday to give Trump a legislative victory, though it is still not clear that they have the necessary votes to pass the health care bill. This could go down to the wire.