Meet Hunter Taylor, The Man Reportedly Behind Revenge Porn Site Texxxan

In Januay, a number of Texas women filed a class action lawsuit (press release and amended complaint here) against revenge porn site Texxan.com (also known as Texxxans.com).   The lawsuit spiked media interest in the “revenge porn” underworld, and the operator of Texxxan made several appearances to defend his venture, always careful to shield his identity with anonymous proxies, voice modulators, and adopting the pseudonym “James Smith.”

The site, after repeatedly ‘polling’ its visitors as to whether it should stay online and receiving ‘positive’ results, abruptly shut down on January 28.  Visitors were greeted with a default “pageok” message from the Godaddy-hosted site with no explanation as to why a site supposedly so popular with its visitors would simply disappear.  “James Smith” chalked up the closure as the result of the “lease” on the site expiring.

The site’s closure, however, had little to do with a “lease” expiring and more to do with GoDaddy shutting the site down for violating its Terms of Service becuse the site was registered under a false name.  Perhaps it also had to do with investigators closing in on the man apparently behind the site.

And his mother.

Hunter Taylor, Texxxan

Meet Hunter Taylor of Beaumont, Texas, who will shortly be added to the lawsuit against Texxxan.  As if the revenge porn underworld could use another Hunter.

Hunter Taylor, 24, is a student at Lamar University.  Under a hodgepodge of fictitious business names (among them Affordable Systems Online, ASO MediaGroup, and SETXAdvertising), Taylor offers a variety of computer services relating to web design, online media, and advertising.  (Taylor’s LinkedIn lists him as the owner of “Affordable Systems”, a “Thomas Hunter” posted a variety of “ASO” videos on Youtube,    and operated a variety of southeast Texas and Louisiana sites registered to his “Affordable Systems” company.)

Taylor is a self-proclaimed “penetration tester” — a term often usurped by amateur hackers — offering to provide “surveillance” of “employees, children, or anyone” and replicate “the experience and capabilities of your most dangerous online enemy” to find security holes before they’re found by a hacker.  The site remarks:

“AFFORDABLE SYSTEMS also makes it a priority to empower our customers by providing easy acess to specialty surveillance technology used by government enforcement agencies and investigators in the private sector. These products are very powerful and do have a risk of being used for malicious reasons AFFORDABLE SYSTEMS accepts no liability if these products are misused DONT FORGET TO ASK ABOUT OUR COVERT SYSTEMS ASWELL AS OUR NEW HACKER FOR HIRE SERVICE.”

Hunter_Taylor_Texxxan_Photo_2

(Despite being a “hacker” and “penetration tester,” Hunter Taylor with little prompting informed me of a particular error he was receiving on my site, along with the type of device he was using — giving me the information necessary to identify his Verizon IP address. Oops.)

In addition to being a hacker, Hunter Taylor allegedly has a history of appearing in porn himself.  Unlike the women featured on revenge porn site Texxxan, Hunter Taylor had the comparable luxury of appearing in pornographic material under a pseudonym.  So much for that.

According to the press release, Hunter Taylor adopted the name “Burt Marten” or “Burt Marten III,” appearing in both straight and gay porn movies like this one (link definitely not safe for work).  And he certainly looks like him:

photo (1) image (6)

 

That’s not Taylor’s only connection to the adult industry.  A domain name registered under the same email address and fake company — FloppyToys.com — once offered dildos and other sex toys for sale online.  The Jacksonville, Florida address the site was registered under appears to be a rural location — unlikely to be a real address for a real company, adult or otherwise.

Nor are Taylor’s online ventures limited to porn and web design.  One site apparently operated by Taylor — SouthBomb.com — was a site dedicated to streaming pirated movies.  One of Taylor’s lesser sins, in the context of his revenge porn ventures.

How is Hunter Taylor connected to Texxxan?  

Hunter Taylor — under his own name, one of his “ASO” monikers, or through friends and family members — operated a variety of mundane, non-pornographic websites relating to Southeast Texas and Louisiana, including SETX-Today.info, SETXDaily.com, CajunObits.com, and CajunObituaries.com.

In January, 2012, Hunter Taylor apparently began preparing to start a porn site of his own, registering SETXGirls.com, SoutheastTexasgirls.com, and SoutheastTexasGirls.info under his own name.  Those sites were never launched.

A month later, the Texxxan domains were registered, and the first posts to Texxans.com were dated July 15, 2012.  In particular, Texxxan.com was registered in Hunter Taylor’s own name, and remained registered in Taylor’s name at least through July 12 — a mere three days before the purported first post on Texxxans.com.  By September, the registration of Texxxan.com was privatized — removing Hunter Taylor’s name from the public records.

That would seem to be a risky move: hosting a porn site on a domain once registered in Hunter Taylor’s own name.  But the Texxxan.com domain doesn’t appear to have always been used to host the porn site itself — at least not until the media uproar sent traffic to Texxxan.com.  Rather, that domain was used to host a website for a fake clothing company and the PayPal membership payment page for the revenge porn site.  That was a ruse to prevent PayPal from discovering that it was being used to pay for porn, which is prohibited by PayPal’s Terms of Service.

To ward against being unmasked, the revenge porn site was shifted to Texxxans.com, a domain registered in by “Kris Kronowski” of “dsvc” — also known as “Deep South Communications.”  The address listed on the registration is adjacent to a college, but doesn’t exist — and “Kris Kronowski” is similarly imaginary.

Hunter Taylor also registered Texxxan.info under the name “Thomas Hunter” — the same name he used to upload the “ASO MediaGroup” YouTube videos — Thomas being his middle name.  That domain appears to never have been used.

But that wasn’t the only revenge porn site Hunter Taylor was involved with.  Hunter Taylor, adopting the “Kris Kronowski” identity, also created revenge porn sites (each using a similar design or linking to Texxxan) DirtyBlast.comDirtyBlast.info, and — crucially — CajunWins.com and LouisianaWins.com.  Note the use of Cajun in the domain names and consider Hunter Taylor’s earlier, mundane sites: CajunObituaries.com and CajunObits.com.  Note also that most of Hunter Taylor’s websites use a .com and .info top level domain name — never a .net or a .org.  

The naming convention isn’t the only commonality across Hunter Taylor’s unobjectionable and revenge porn sites.  Each of Hunter Taylor’s sites used WordPress as the content management system.  Further, the logo for each of the sites was in a PNG format.

Both Hunter Taylor’s mundane sites and revenge porn sites were also hosted not only on the same GoDaddy server (IP ddress: 97.74.47.1), but on the same GoDaddy account.  When the Texxxan account was suspended by GoDaddy, almost all of Hunter Taylor’s other sites were suspended, returning the same “pageok” response from the server.

That includes the site Hunter Taylor apparently built for his mother’s business, Even-Tho.com.

Revenge Pornographer Tip #1: when setting up your revenge porn site, don’t host it on the same server as your mom’s website.  That’s just unseemly, man.

That would seem to establish that Hunter Taylor at a minimum registered, designed, and hosted the Texxxan and related revenge porn sites.  This is the conclusion I was able to reach with a couple of hours of research using records available to anyone with a DomainTools.com account.  Frankly, I’m surprised that media outlets with considerable resources didn’t discover this information.

Or perhaps the media reached the same conclusion I did: we can prove his involvement in the site, but does he manage it?

Klein Investigations, the firm hired by the lawsuit’s plaintiffs, concludes that he does.  The information they’ve been able to uncover is damning.

First, emails sent from the management@texxxan.com email address were traced back to Hunter Taylor’s IP address.  Similarly, records subpoenaed from GoDaddy reportedly show that Hunter Taylor’s IP address was used to upload files to the site.

Revenge Pornographer Tip #2when paying for your revenge porn site, don’t use your mother’s credit card.

So what does this mean for Hunter Taylor? He should probably hire an attorney.  Of the dozens (if not hundreds) of women that were pictured on the site, some were reportedly only 16 years old in their photos.  Perhaps as importantly, a message posted on the Texxxan website appeared to indicate that its ‘management’ encouraged women pictured on the site to sign up as ‘members’ in order to prevent additional photos from appearing on that or other sites:

NOTE: Their have been a few misrepresentations of this website such as the claims that have been made alleging that this website wanted credit information for submission removal from the site, which is certainly not the case.  In the beginnings of TEXXXAN.COM the viewers and users given administrator access to the site where instructed to give those with great concerns about being submitted to the website an option of research, prevention and filtering which meant that this websites research team would go and scrape the internet for matching images and inform individuals of where they may be found elsewhere on the internet and any possible actions thatcould be taken to have them removed as well as applying filters to TEXXXAN.COM for images and keywords relevant to teh individuals to prevent any further submissions form making their way onto TEXXXAN.COM This option was discontinued as soon as certain individuals began making false claims against the website.

I reached out to Hunter Taylor to offer a chance to rebut these allegations.  He responded the same night I emailed him:

A response to these claims is currently in progress. We do have lawyers in this matter and investigations are currently under way pertaining to this issue therefore any claims made by anyone linking individuals to the site in question will be under review by lawyers etc. Please refrain from making any false claims until you have been notified otherwise. Please expect a proper response within 24 hours on this issue.

I’m skeptical that Taylor had “lawyers” reviewing the issue and “investigations” underway — Taylor’s father reportedly later asked an investigator from Klein Investigations whether his son needed a lawyer.  I perceived Taylor’s response to be a veiled threat of litigation for reporting on his connection to the site.  The next day, he wrote a similar email promising a statement within 24 hours.  Taylor never provided the promised response in the two weeks since I first approached him.

More as this story develops.

39 comments

  1. I love how once I let him know who he was on a site he was posting on he started deleting all his online accounts like LinkedIn, etc. Too late. Oh well. Great job Adam.

  2. That_Anonymous_Coward says:

    Gee he seems really upset that someone would put his identity out there… what’s good for everyone else wasn’t good for him too?

  3. James Smith says:

    Sorry, but that guy is not me. He looks like he is only 24 or 25. I’m just a bit older than 25. My Linked In is stuff up. But since you do not know my real name, what difference does it make. Knowing A guy is not the same as knowing THE guy, as I told you before, Cpt. Obvious.

  4. James Smith says:

    I have been interviewed by The Wall Street Journal, CNN, ABC News,
    the Houston Chronicle, the UK Guardian, the UK Sun, NY Times, the Times
    of India, Sky News, Der Speigel, the AP, Yahoo News, MSN, the South
    China Morning Post, and numerous other news outlets since this all
    broke. At first being extremely reluctant, I only gave email
    statements. Then after a bit I did some telephone interviews. And
    recently an in person interview. Of course voice altering / disguises
    are used.

    So, Mr. Smart Guy – you can drag this Mr. “H” into a courtroom, but
    what do you think will happen to the case when its not me that’s in that
    room, but some random person who is not THE person? What do you think
    will happen when I slip an envelope under the door of defense counsel’s
    office?

    Do you honestly think that I am afraid of some ham & egg attorney from Beaumont, Texas??

    Section 230 of the CDA provides the website with absolute immunity. The lawyer
    that filed this has a well documented history of frivolous litigation.
    Just go check out the website Operation Klein Watch. I’d never heard
    of Mr. Morgan and his sidekick Mr. Klein before this case. But when I
    googled them, that is what I found and it made me sick. This guy has
    about as much credibility as Gloria Allred or Al Sharpton. So go check
    out that website and tell me what you think.

    Operation Klein Watch. Check it out.

    The lawyer filed a lawsuit in state court in Texas alleging various state
    invasion of privacy-type torts. No federal causes of action were
    alleged, to include copyright violations. See paragraph nine of the
    lawsuit. However, under Texas law, if a person has a diminished or
    reduced expectation of privacy, they cannot sue for invasion of privacy
    at all. When you take a nude photograph of yourself and you send it to
    this other person, or when you allow someone to take a nude photograph
    of you, by your very actions you have reduced your expectation of
    privacy!!! And, under the law, when you have a reduced expectation of
    privacy, you simply cannot sue for invasion of privacy.

    I also find it extremely telling that none of the ex-boyfriends were
    named in this lawsuit. The only folks sued for invasion of privacy were
    GoDaddy (simply for hosting the site), and the sites admins and users.
    But not the boys who actually violated the girls’ privacy and/or trust. I wonder why.

    • A very impressive demonstration of the copy and paste function of your computer! Bravo.

      For a “lawyer,” you have a very strong understanding of… Nah, I’ll let you learn this the hard way.

      But let’s talk about what you DO know. If, per your claim, Hunter Taylor is the wrong guy, what’s his connection to the site?

  5. James Smith says:

    With regards to under aged photos, again, the CDA provides the website
    with ABSOLUTE immunity. The person’s who committed child porn acts are
    (1) the girl in the photo and, (2) whomever person she sexted the pics,
    to, likely another boy; and, (3) whomever posted it on the Texxxan site.

    Self-made
    child porn is still child porn and young girls get arrested for this
    all the time. And the CDA also provides the website with absolutely
    immunity!

    Facebook does not go to jail when you post child porn on it. Neither will the Texxxan. The one that goes to jail is the young girl who made her child porn and the young girl (or boy) who decided to post it to the website. Self-made child porn is child porn. So if you are going to allege that there was CP on the site, then you have to prove it was CP. and to do that you got to get the model to prove her age and then she will be cross-examined as to her involvement in the production of the child porn, which will subject her to criminal charges. And anyone involved with her will also be subjected to criminal charges.

    So all you little girls making pix of ur lady parts — Watch out! If you posted them onto the Texxxan website, I will be looking to put your ass in jail and letting the whole world know that you are a child pornographer. I will work to see you get life time sex offender registration so when people google your name they will see your involvement here. Mark my words, little ones. Self-made child porn is child porn!! Google it and you will see how many of you kids get sex offender status every year for doing this. If I can, I will add your names to the list, so bring it.

    • Michael S. says:

      Ohhh myyyy…someone fancies himself a lawyer. Did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night? I know I did.

      • Captain Obvious says:

        Yep he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Also In Texas it’s already a felony. Texas’s improper-photography statute, Texas Penal Code Section 21.15, makes it a felony to “broadcast[], or transmit[] a visual image of another…without the other person’s consent; and…with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.”

        • James Smith says:

          Wow – it looks so bad when you cherry pick the words. But the actual
          statute itself deals with HIDDEN CAMERAS and up skirt type pics – not
          pics you send me or I take, and that I later post online.

          Sorry,
          dude, but consent to transmit or post the images is not an element to
          the offense. It is only consent to make the initial photos. You have
          to take the plain meaning of the words.

          (b) A person commits an offense if the person:

          (1)
          photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records,
          broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is
          not a bathroom or private dressing room:

          (A) without the other person’s consent; and

          (B) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;

          (2)
          photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records,
          broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is
          a bathroom or private dressing room:

          (A) without the other person’s consent; and

          (B) with intent to:

          (i) invade the privacy of the other person; or

          (ii) arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; or

  6. Captain obvious says:

    And James – I mean Hunter Taylor is STILL lying. He’s not a lawyer he doesn’t know what the shit he’s talking about, and his identity has bee VERIFIED.

    Hunter, not being a REAL lawyer doesn’t seem to understand a lawsuit can be AMMENDED and this one has to include his parents and Austin Ray Ponthieu. By his logic, a victim of underage porn would be liable and go to jail – thats total BS. By his logic anyone who distributes child porn or has child porn on their computer can’t be arrested. The DOJ issued new regulations that expand the definition of a “secondary producer” of sexually explicit material. As of June 23, 2005, new federal regulations apply the record-keeping requirement to these secondary producers, and defines them as anyone “who inserts on a computer site or service a digital image of, or otherwise manages the sexually explicit content of a computer site or service that contains a
    visual depiction” of sexually explicit conduct.

    Hunter needs a bigger shovel – his failboat is sinking fast.

    • James Smith says:

      I never mentioned VICTIMS of child porn. Only that people who make their own child porn get arrested all the time. So any girl who took naked pics of herself is criminally liable. Girls posing for pics get thrown in jail all the time. (And, FYI – under the law, nudity does not automatically equal child porn.)

      The CDA applies to the Texxxan website and provides absolute liability. By your logic, mark Zuckerberg can be arrested every time someone posts an under age pic on FB.

      http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/15/self-made-kiddie-porn/?page=all

      http://news.cnet.com/Police-blotter-Teens-prosecuted-for-racy-photos/2100-1030_3-6157857.html

      http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/01/kids/

      You’re still a clown. I am not Hunter Taylor or his parents or that other kid (or his parents). You still haven’t found me. A person is not THE person. When I sat for that TV interview last week, did I look like a 24 yr old kid? No, I did not. Was I in Texas or even in the United States? No. I was not.

      • Joe Pullen says:

        “So any girl who took naked pics of herself is criminally liable. Girls posing for pics get thrown in jail all the time”

        Really? So you being a lawyer can of course not only cite the exact law but the case precedent as well right?

        Meanwhile why don’t you read this from a REAL lawyer who works in Texas. Who happen to agree wtih you on a few points but who also clearly knows the law better than you do. Go ahead – explain exactly how this lawyer who is extemely well known and has the bonifides is wrong. Please.

        http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2013/02/isnt-revenge-porn-constitutionally-protected.html

        I’m sorry but I’m with everyone else – I don’t believe you are a laywer at all.

        • James Smith says:

          Guess you did not click the links I included. Each of those articles discusses under age girls who have been arrested for sending naked pics to boys. And, Joe, if you saw me on TV you would clearly see that I am not 24. Not even close.

          • Pray tell, what TV interview was that?

          • Joe Pullen says:

            We are not talking about the ISP. Any suit against GoDaddy will very likely fail. We are talking about Texxxan in the context of a “distributor”.

            I looked at the articles on the links. Setting aside the fact they are not case law, they are in fact not relevant. The girls you refer to were released and no formal charges were filed. In your eagerness to make a point of the girls being arrested, you completely overlooked both that fact AND the fact the boys RECEIVING THE PICTURES WERE ARRESTED AS WELL AS THOSE WHO DISTRIBUTED THE PICTURES.

            You are also incorrect on 230. It is NOT an absolute protection against the requirements of 2257. I understand 2257 is not part of the case against Texxxan but you have stated 230 provides absolute immunity and it does not. As of June 23, 2005, Federal regulations apply the record-keeping requirement of 2257 has been expanded to include “secondary producers”. It specifically defines secondary producers as anyone “who inserts on a computer site or service a digital image of, or otherwise manages the sexually explicit content of a computer site or service that contains a visual depiction” of sexually explicit conduct.” GoDaddy will not fall under this provision but Texxxan most certainly will.

            As far as your identity:

            Other than saying Hunter Taylor is not you, you’ve done nothing to factually refute any of the information Adam has posted above.

            If your intent is to remain anonymous and you are not as you state Hunter Taylor, then the most logical course of action would be for you to say nothing and let us continue to believe you are Hunter Taylor. But that is not what you’re doing which makes it only more clear you are Hunter Taylor.

            In this article dated Jan. 29 http://m.sacurrent.com/news/confessions-of-a-revenge-pornographer-1.1436638
            you mention someone by the name of Klein. Klein is the investigator hired by John Morgan to locate you. Klein’s name was not mentioned in any news article or other public source until well after that. If you are not Hunter Taylor, then how else would you have known about Klein?

            A few people went to check your LinkedIn profile and it was no
            longer there (hidden). When Captain Obvious mentioned how suspicious it was that your LinkedIn profile disappeared after your identity was exposed, it suddenly reappeared. Those actions in of themselves demonstrate you are Hunter Taylor.

            Lastly, why would I believe you when you say you are not Hunter Taylor or that Hunter Taylor is not responsible for Texxxan? Given the evidence Adam has presented here, what I have mentioned above, and what Klein has uncovered, it seems very clear you are lying.

            Meanwhile everyone else should ignore James Smiths’ legal interpretations as it appears he is only attempting to intimidate victims from coming forward. Anyone looking for “James Smith the lawyer” might want to try locating him at 1-800-IMA-FAKE.

          • Joe Pullen says:

            Yes I read them and by posting them here and referring to
            them as your proof points you yet again Hunter Taylor you prove you are not a real lawyer – they are not relevant case law.
            The girls mentioned in those articles were released and no formal
            charges were filed. Also you apparently overlooked the fact that the boys receiving the photos were ALSO ARRESTED as were others who RECEIVED AND DISTRIBUTED THE PHOTOS.

            You’ve been unable to cite any actual cases supporting your
            interpretation of the law. If you had ever read a proper legal briefing you would know that prior cases and excerpts are cited to support the legal interpretation of the law of the person filing the brief. Simply cutting and pasting sections of the law an stating YOUR interpretation of them does not make you correct.

            You continue to state that 230 provides absolute immunity. That’s simply not true. While specific case against you may not include violation of 2257, one thing is for certain, 230 DOES NOT provide
            absolute immunity against the requirements of 2257. As of June 23, 2005, the DOJ issued regulations that expand the definition of a “secondary producer” of sexually explicit material. These Federal regulations apply the record-keeping requirement to these secondary producers, and defines them as anyone “who inserts on a computer site or service a digital image f, or otherwise manages the sexually explicit content of a computer site or ervice that contains a visual depiction” of sexually explicit onduct”. The ISP GoDaddy may be immune, but not you. Aaron is correct in his comment on this point.

          • the.klansman says:

            Joe ur a retard and u obviously did not even read the news articles. From the first article “The three 14- and 15-year-old girls who sent the self-made child porn and the three 16- and 17-year-old boys who received it were arrested.” From the second article “A 2-1 majority upholds conviction on grounds the girl produced a photograph featuring the sexual conduct of a child.” From the third article ” prosecutors in Greensburg, Pennsylvania charged six teens ranging in age from 14 to 17 with creating, distributing and possessing child pornography, after three girls were found to have taken photos of themselves in the nude or partially nude and e-mailed them to friends, including three boys who are among the defendants.”

            Girls are getting arrested all the time for sending naked pics to boys.

          • Joe Pullen says:

            Well Klansman, you do seem mighty interested in defending “James’” post and osition on posting underage and specifically focusing on girls getting arrested for it and not the boys. Why is that? I always have to wonder what sort of a individual has a blog icon of a “pedo bear” goes by the handle Klansman and posts things like this:

            the.klansman posted a comment in Rapper T-Baby Says She’s
            Receiving ‘Racist Threats’ After Video Appeared On ‘Beavis & Butthead’ · 2 months ago

            “What are you all, brain dead niggers? She is making the shit up! Oh, Im no snitch – but then she gets on the interwebs and tells the world about this? yeah, that makes sense. Sense only to a crackhead knee grow, maybe. stupid coon”

            Or perhaps this racist series of rants:

            the.klansman posted a comment in Former Marine released from
            Mexican prison – The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room · 2 months ago

            “kill a beaner cop and u wont get arrested so u can get away”

            “moral of the story is kill as many beaners as you can and don’t get taken alive when they try to arrest you”

            “too bad his marine buddies didn’t go down there and resuce him and kill all those filthy beaner animals inthe process.”

          • Guest says:

            so ur surprised that somebody who goes by the name ‘klansman’ is a racist? wow what a n00b!

          • AdamSteinbaugh says:

            I’m even less surprised that you’re the same person as “klansman.”

          • Joe Pullen says:

            I’m even less surprised that klansman and james don’t realize I’ve made statements here with deliberately incorrect components in order to draw them out and get them to post their silliness. Guess it worked. James, Klansman, you’ve been officially trolled by the REAL Joe Pullen as evidenced by my accompanying avatar.

      • Joe Pullen says:

        I also don’t believe you when you say you are not Hunter Taylor. Adam and the PI on the case seem to have very clear evidence to the contrary. Not only that but if you are not him, why would you be here posting that? It would make much more sense since you apparently want to keep your identity hidden that you allow us to continue to think Hunter Taylor is in fact the person.
        Sorry no one here is buyig your story.

  7. Michelle says:

    Thank you for putting this scum bag on blast. Having grown up with him and meeting his family I can not fathom how such nice people produced such a rotten human being. His grandmother in particular is a very sweet and generous person. I hope he is ashamed of what he’s done. I particularly like the part about how he got to walk into the world of porn using a pseudonym and how these girls have not had the same experience.

  8. Arron A Arronson says:

    If the website host child pornography the website manager is liable for the pictures placed on the website, as it is his/her responsibility to maintain the sites integrity. To say that user content management is not the responsibility of the site manager is like saying, “No officer I am not liable for this car wreck even though I let a drunk driver take the wheel of my car, gave them the keys, and then ignored them while I remain sober in the passenger seat.” And you say its the girls fault and part of it is, I won’t argue with that statement but the majority of the fault falls on the web manager for not removing these pictures as soon as they were posted. Even 4chan has mods that delete cheese pizza as soon as it is posted. It would be like if Piratebay was being hosted in America they would shut them down and jail and fine the shit out of those guys, because their site allows USERS to post copyrighted material for download via Peer-to-peer downloading. They aren’t prosecuted since they are located in hosted in a country with no extradition treaty with the US. You made a revenge porn site, underage girls were posted on it and you as the web manager didn’t take the appropriate action in a timely manner, so be a real man and accept the consequences for your actions.

    • Arron A Arronson says:

      To clear it up, the reason I brought up piratebay and its users uploading Copyrighted material, was because it isn’t the admins who are uploading it, it is the users. Regardless of the USERS uploading it the government wants to go after the ADMINS and MANAGERS of the site.

  9. pumbaaa says:

    I went to high-school with the guy.

  10. Him says:

    Hunter Is not James Smith, this is either a ruse to distort information or some fan of the site that is just looking for attention.

  11. justice says:

    I wonder if this was the person hired to hack some of lamar university’s fsculty/staff employee profiles and also conduct surveilance on some of these employees???

  12. sohughj says:

    “Penetration tester,” huh. Mkay.

  13. POed in Cali says:

    All I can say is this guy makes me rethink the old drawing and quartering punishment.

    If more men were victims of crimes like this, people would take it seriously!!

  14. […] and Facebook profile along with their private parts. On his blog, Steinbaugh has helped expose the “white-hat hacker”/porn actor behind Texxxan, the dubious dynamic duo running YouGotPosted, and the Oklahoman drummer operating WinByState; he […]

  15. […] and Facebook profile along with their private parts. On his blog, Steinbaugh has helped expose the “white-hat hacker”/porn actor behind Texxxan, the dubious dynamic duo running YouGotPosted, and the Oklahoman drummer operating WinByState; he […]

  16. […] and Facebook profile along with their private parts. On his blog, Steinbaugh has helped expose the “white-hat hacker”/porn actor behind Texxxan, the dubious dynamic duo running YouGotPosted, and the Oklahoman drummer operating WinByState; he […]

  17. […] and Facebook profile along with their private parts. On his blog, Steinbaugh has helped expose the “white-hat hacker”/porn actor behind Texxxan, the dubious dynamic duo running YouGotPosted, and the Oklahoman drummer operating WinByState; he […]

  18. Dan Waters says:

    It looks like he has no soul. Dead, evil eyes. Looks capable of doing horrible things.

  19. […] For their part, GoDaddy shut down the site briefly last year after allegations that some of the women pictured in Texxxan had been under the age of consent at the time the photos were taken. The BBC reports that the FBI is investigating the allegations. After the lawsuit was filed, Texxxan became a members-only site and on January 28, 2013, finally went offline, allegedly because GoDaddy discovered it’d been registered using a false name. […]

Leave a Comment