Privacy advocates decry a campaign to require criminal screenings by dating websites.

By David Colker, Times Staff Writer

Dating has always been a delicate dance of information swapping: What to reveal
when?

Now some lawmakers want to regulate it by requiring online dating services to conduct background checks on their
clients.

The push runs counter to the prevailing sentiment about privacy. In the wake of high-profile breaches at
information brokers ChoicePoint Inc. and Reed Elsevier's LexisNexis, state and federal legislators called for tighter control of personal information, with less, rather than more, disclosure.

Most online dating sites, including IAC/InterActiveCorp's Match.com and Yahoo Inc.'s Yahoo Personals, oppose background-check bills in key statehouses around the country. But competitor True supports them ? and, in fact, is bankrolling the campaign.

True's founder and chief executive, Herb Vest, believes that every online dating service should conduct
background checks, as True does.

"The primary motivation is to protect people from criminal predation online," Vest said. "I can't imagine anyone with a hatful of brains being against that."

Vest said he spent $200,000 last year on lobbyists around the country. Although opponents charge that his goal is
to gain publicity for his site, the legislation has met with at least some success in four states.

The Michigan House of Representatives late last year passed legislation based on a model bill written by True; it wasn't approved by the state's Senate but was reintroduced in both houses this year. Similar measures are being considered in Florida and Texas, and an Ohio lawmaker plans to introduce one this month. A California version was pulled before a committee could vote on it this year.

"This is one of those feel-good kind of legislations that politicians can get behind," said analyst Charlene Li of Forrester Research Inc.

Privacy advocates are alarmed.

"The notion that we should be requiring yet another industry to do background checks is chilling," said Barry Steinhart, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Technology and Liberty Program.

"It hurtles us further into a surveillance society in which every action is going to be investigated by an
entity with no accountability."

Raising the stakes for both sides is that a law in any one state could effectively create a national standard because of the difficulties in applying different local standards to Internet commerce.

"I
think every lobbyist in town is involved in this one, one way or the other," said Michigan state Sen. Alan Cropsey, a Republican, who is a sponsor of the bill being considered in his state.

Internet daters themselves are divided. John Knowlton, 52, who teaches journalism at a community college in Auburn, Wash., said he was uncomfortable with government taking a role in the matter. And he found it unfair that online dating was being singled
out.

"Every day, thousands of personal ads appear in print," Knowlton said. "Why wouldn't they be subjected to the same
thing?"

Elana Luber, 35, a lawyer in the Los Angeles area, is generally in favor of background checks, saying: "Who wouldn't want to have people screened for something so basic as whether or not they're a criminal?"

The bills generally would mandate that online dating services find out whether clients have been convicted of felonies and post that information or ban convicted felons from their sites.

Texas state Rep. Will Hartnett, a Republican, put opponents in the same category as those who would "defend child molesters who prey on people on the Internet." He dismissed the worries about privacy being compromised.

"As far as I am concerned," he said, "anyone convicted of a felony loses the right of privacy."

Ohio state Rep. Tom Patton, a Republican, said he planned to introduce a version of the bill because of the dangers women in particular face online. "They are more trusting," he said.

In promoting mandatory background checks, Vest cites several incidents of violence and fraud he says people suffered at the hands of ne'er-do-wells they met on the Internet.

But Vest acknowledges that it's not clear whether a search of criminal records would have prevented any of those incidents. And in California, Assemblywoman Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills) said she withdrew a background-check bill she had introduced after True's lobbyists couldn't give her concrete examples of anything untoward an online dater had endured that a check might have derailed.

That's a key problem, said Beth Givens, director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse in San Diego. Givens said
her objections centered on shortcomings in the records culled by background-checking companies.

"Because these sites don't cover every jurisdiction in the country, it could give a false
sense of security," Givens said.

The
background-check service that True uses is Rapsheets Criminal Records, which is
owned by ChoicePoint. The service's coverage is spotty in some states. In
California, Rapsheets can search Superior Court records in only four of the
state's 58 counties.

"The privacy laws in
California are stricter than just about anywhere else," said Camille Gamble,
director of marketing at Rapsheets, headquartered in Memphis, Tenn. She said the
only statewide record the company was able to access for California was a
sex-offender list.

"We think we do a good
job in covering the country," Gamble said. "But no nongovernment database can be
100%."

Background checks could eat into
the bottom lines of dating services or increase the costs to clients. Most are
privately held or owned by corporations that don't break out the results. The
big exceptions: Match.com and Udate.com, which are part of Barry Diller's IAC.

Last year IAC's online dating sites
generated $198 million in revenue for the company, according to a Securities and
Exchange Commission filing. That was up $12.7 million, or 7%, from 2003,
underscoring the popularity of Internet dating. About 8.4 million people were
paid subscribers of dating sites in 2004, according to Jupiter Research.

Match.com has about 1 million paid
subscribers, said spokeswoman Kristin Kelly. She defended the safety of the
sites, saying that clients get to know one another online before they mutually
decide to meet. She added that there had been fewer than 10 reported violent
crimes in connection with people who met at Match.com in a decade of operation.

"We are not a chat room; we are an
online community where you get the chance to communicate with someone as long as
you want without letting them even know your real name," she said. "We think
it's even safer than in a traditional meeting place like a bar, where you meet
someone and might give your information
sooner.

"As far as we are concerned," she
said of Vest's background-check campaign, "this is a ploy to force one site's
business plan on the entire
industry."

Vest, 60, defended his plan,
saying that it was born less of business interests than a personal crusade
against violence.

Shortly before his
second birthday in 1946, he said, his mother found his father dead at his
cabinetry business. The death was judged a suicide, but recently, Vest said, he
uncovered evidence that it was a homicide. (The case was featured on CBS-TV's
"48 Hours" news program this year.)

"The
murder of my father certainly left its mark on me," Vest said. "I believe that I
perhaps have a great deal more compassion about these matters. Deep down, I want
to protect people from criminals."

There
could be long-term economic benefits from standardized background checks for the
entire industry, said Vest, who founded a financial-services company that was
sold to Wells Fargo & Co. in 2001 for $127.5
million.

"If we gain the overall public
acceptance of online dating, we can more than double the number of people coming
to us," Vest said. "The other sites are being myopic; they are only interested
in short-term gain."

Li, the Forrester
Research analyst, said she didn't have any indication that criminal background
checks would be a boost to the industry. But she said there was a common
deception plaguing Internet daters.

"The
fraud comes when someone says, "I'm a 6-foot-2 athlete and weigh 180 pounds,"
she said.

"Then they show up at the door
and the reality is that they are 5-foot-8, 240 pounds and have not run a mile in
years. A background check is not going to help you with
that."

Meeting
online

Number of unique visitors to
top Internet dating sites in March (in
millions)

Yahoo Personals:
5.93

Match.com sites:
3.96

Spark Networks:
3.37

EHarmony.com:
2.73

True.com:
2.54

IMatchup sites:
2.54

Love@AOL:
1.72

Tickle personals:
1.37

HotMatchup.com:
1.13

DateCam.com: 0.94

From Steve Winkler: Here's a great quote from the
ACLU.

This push for securer sites has
privacy advocates alarmed. "The notion that we should be requiring yet another
industry to do background checks is chilling," said Barry Steinhart, director of
the American Civil Liberties Union's Technology and Liberty Program. "It hurtles
us further into a surveillance society in which every action is going to be
investigated by an entity with no accountability."

See, people who know what they are
talking about are looking out for the better part of society that doesn't see
this as a step in the right direction for
anyone.

Those pushing this legislation
can't get their story straight. The story changes depending on who they are
talking to, there is no congruent message being delivered and that is the part
which makes me and most doubt the real intentions. It is a push for legislation
and disclosure but giving businesses the right to choose either. Additionally,
as history shows those pushing this through have used legislation in the past to
get rich.

They proponents have also
taken the stance that if you're not with us you're against us AND YOUR
CUSTOMER'S SAFETY. That is ridiculous and not conducive to growing an industry
which genuinely has value to all single Americans.

Reference:

IAC/Match - Peripatetic Diller

DAILY RECORD / BUSINESS WEEK -- Apr 13 -- Diller was born in San Francisco, the son of a wealthy real-estate developer, and he was not a good student. At Beverly Hills High, he was fired from the newspaper for...

Reference:

Bolt.com

Right now there are 17, 827 people online over at the Bolt.com ?hang out?. Where categories range from Movies & TV to Sex & Dating, Gaming, Music, Style, Sports, American Idol, AIM Icons, Quotes, Ringtones, Game Revolution, Quizzes, Horoscopes, and TAG.

According to their about: ?...  Bolt is the #1 youth hangout on the Web, bringing together 4.5 million young
people each month to exchange ideas about everything from final exams to the war in Iraq. Bolt is the basement, park,
college dorm, sidewalk café or the 7-11 parking lot – it?s a place where young people come to meet others and talk
about everything. Authenticity is at the core of all that we do??

Bolt is located in Soho, NYC and is led by Aaron Cohen, CEO. They recently released a study on
?Youth Happiness? (pdf file link) with the subtext
that it ?Turns out High School and College Kids Are Actually Pretty Happy? with 67% of 15-22 year olds counting
themselves as happy to very happy. Who knew?

RSS feeds brought to you by

Userplane Apps: Live communication applications powering the world's leading online communities.

Reference:

CGI Holding Corp buys Vintacom

No, this is not another April fools gag. CGI Holding Corporation will merge, through two wholly owned subsidiaries, with privately held Vintacom Media Group and Real Estate School Online. Vintacom owns The Relationship Exchange. CGI Holding will change it's name...