The Mugshot Industry. Accurate Information That Is Beneficial For Consumers?

Thursday night, ABC Nightline reported about problems consumers encountered with the mugshot industry -- websites that publish online photos of citizens arrested by law enforcement. While there have been very public, high-profile cases of celebrities' mugshots, the reality is that many consumers have been affected.

You've never heard of the mugshot industry? Neither had I until this Nightline report:

"Here's how it works, the sites legally download the latest mug shots from police web sites [that] published the faces of alleged lawbreakers on the Internet. And then often charge the accused of -- sometimes hundreds of dollars to pull all the photos..."

That's right. The sites charge consumers a fee, sometimes called a "take-down fee," to remove their mugshot photos. There are several problems with this. First, after paying one website to remove their mugshot photo, many consumers find that their mugshot photos re-appear on another website. Second, many sites don't consistently remove mugshot photos of consumers wrongfully arrested or found innocent by a court:

"... Sofia on Roddy says that was not her experience dealing with other companies she says she explained over and over again how she was the victim. And how the photos were preventing her from obtaining employment. And she provided these court document showing that prosecutors cleared her case. This was a wrongful arrests. And the case was dismissed by the state attorney's office. But her picture remains published..."

That does not sound good at all. According to ABC Nightline, there are 60 such mugshot websites. I searched online and easily found several within five minutes:

• Tampa Bay Mugshots (Florida)
• Busted! Mugshots
• Sarasota Mugshots (Florida)
• Springfield Mugshots (Missouri)
• Just Mugshots
• Shasta Mugshots (California)
• Gwinnett County Mugshots (Georgia)
• Mugshots Ocala (Florida)
• Mugshots Atlanta (Georgia)
• Go Upstate Mugshots (South Carolina)
• Cincy Mugshots (Ohio)
• Mugshots Gainsville (Florida)
• Who's Arrested

Some sites focus on a specific city or country, while others include several states and/or geographic areas. I am sure that some sites operate responsibly. Some are operated by newspapers. Why is this industry growing quickly? The ABC Nightline report interviewed one mugshot website operator, who admitted:

"Think of how many people have been arrested. Now put a small service fee on data -- of people and you can see why the industry is sort of taken off..."

Some consumers are fighting back. First, there is at least one blog about the mugshot industry. Increasing awareness among consumers is always good.

Second, in Florida legislators introduced a new bill (HB 677) to require mugshot website operators to automatically take down photos when consumers are found not guilty, or the charges were later dropped. That seems to be a very appropriate common-sense law.

Third, there is a class-action lawsuit in Ohio against several mugshot websites. According to Findlaw, the lawsuit claims:

"... these mugshot websites violate a person's right to publicity... to control how their own names and likenesses are used in the public domain, similar to how someone would own a copyright or patent... these mugshot websites may not publish such photos for the sole purpose of profiting off them, the lawsuit claims. The suit asserts that the websites' primary purpose for publishing these mugshot photos is so that those charged with a crime will pay money to remove their pictures."

The credit reporting industry is catching some most-deserved criticism about high error rates in credit reports. Plus, a couple federal laws govern and dictate a consistent process for consumers to report and challenge errors in credit reports. Accuracy seems important for the mugshot industry. HB 677 is a good start, but that is only one state. Issues with the mugshot industry are likely to continue until consumers pressure their elected officials for improved laws that better balance the privacy rights of consumers with the publishing rights of mugshot websites.

Watch the ABC News/Nightline report. And, learn more about the class-action lawsuit in Ohio.

What do you think of the mugshot industry? If you have been affected by, or paid a take-down fee to a mugshot website, what was your experience?

Comments

[Jeffrey]

I saw the Nightline report as well. TJ is Tyronne Jacques, he doesn't own a mugshot website as far as I know, he runs a reputation management company called RemoveSlander.

With your permission I'd like to point out some issues with the initial Nightline report as well as some if your own observations.

"There are several problems with this. First, after paying one website to remove their mugshot photo, many consumers find that their mugshot photos re-appear on another website. Second, many sites don't consistently remove mugshot photos of consumers wrongfully arrested or found innocent by a court.."

If a publisher publishes something legitimately and incur costs in the process of publishing, and suddenly a person without any copyright or other legal rights to the material comes around and wants it a published article down, shouldn't there be a financial transaction to cover the initial costs, administrative fees, as well as future losses of the material? Essentially what's going on here is that people who feel ashamed of their dirty laundry being published approach the sites on their own and demand/threaten that sites will take the information down or else. This is a global problem, not exclusive to mugshots.

http://www.dmlp.org/blog/2013/florida-bill-targets-%E2%80%9Cmugshot-websites%E2%80%9D-hits-crime-reporting

"First, after paying one website to remove their mugshot photo, many consumers find that their mugshot photos re-appear on another website. "

In other words, it's "oh, why didn't I get that too?!". You have to explore the PROMISE made with the service, not some wishful thinking by arrestees. if you go through these sites you'll see they specifically tell you that the removal is from their database, not from the internet or all existing or future sites that utilize public records. No misrepresentation - no problem.

"Second, many sites don't consistently remove mugshot photos of consumers wrongfully arrested or found innocent by a court:"

What would Casey Anthony to do, or Michael Jackson? The fact that some are innocents or not has no bearing on the legitimate publication of mugshots and arrest records. A mugshot isn't a "disposition shot". It usually just a record that's taken during the investigation process. These sites all have disclaimers, each and every one of them, that say the same. Again, no misrepresentation, no problem.

""... Sofia on Roddy says that was not her experience dealing with other companies she says she explained over and over again how she was the victim. And how the photos were preventing her from obtaining employment. And she provided these court document showing that prosecutors cleared her case. This was a wrongful arrests. And the case was dismissed by the state attorney's office. But her picture remains published...""

She's a victim of free press. The fact that an arrest record can affect your reputation isn't a problem, it's just the way the system works. Don't like the system? Change the constitution.

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/choosing-forum-for-invasion-of-privacy-lawsuit--fe-597021.html

"If someone published a list of persons who had been arrested for DUI, as long as the list is accurate, no one could possibly complain about the fact that his name appears on this list. The same is true for lists and photographs of registered sex offenders. The same is true for mug shots. Do they have the potential for harming your reputation. You bet!! "

" these mugshot websites violate a person's right to publicity."

That lawsuit, initiated by a part-time attorney who again has objectives set on reputation issues, is false and my feeling is it won't go far.

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/choosing-forum-for-invasion-of-privacy-lawsuit--fe-597021.html

"The only potential claim would be for violation of your right of publicity. But this will not fly because the mug shot companies are not suggesting that you endorse their products---they simply publish mug shots of persons who were arrestee and/or convicted.

Indeed, my view is that your claims would be frivolous. I suspect that very few lawyers would be willing to pursue such claims---I would be worried that I would face Rule 11 Sanctions if I would do so. "

HB 677 is dead-on-arrival and completely unconstitutional. In Florida? Good luck getting that one passed.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/608788-hb-677-letter-from-s-morley.html

[Bordeos2000]

Sigh. When are you scammers going to stop posting that free and entirely piss-poor legal advice all over the internet? Why don't you identify yourself to the press instead of posting not credible and long-winded comments.

[Dana Cook]

I was recently arrested and my mugshot was plastered all across the internet as a result. It couldn't have happened at a worse time. I work for the local government and even though I was charged and not convicted of anything it still looks bad. I found www.cleanslatecorp.com on a message board and for one low fee they were able to remove my mugshot. Even though I am still awaiting my day in court I feel so much better not having my mugshot removed from various websites.