Ashley Madison sues South Korea for blocking dating site for married people

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      The infamous Toronto-based website Ashley Madison, designed to help married people hook up with others, is launching a lawsuit against the South Korean government for blocking it in that country.

      The Korean site of Ashley Madison was launched on April 1 but was shut down on April 16 by the Korean Communications Standards Commission.

      Authorities accused the website of encouraging immorality. Adultery is illegal in South Korea.

      The company, which filed a statement of claim in federal court on August 14, denies the accusations. It also alleges the South Korean government is giving unfair advantage to local businesses to operate similar sites to the Ashley Madison one.

      Furthermore, the company claims that the blocking of the site in South Korea affects their market among Korean Canadians and Asian Canadians in Canada as well.

      The company is suing for lost revenues and profits, and general damages for blocking its website.

      Ashley Madison, which first launched in 2002, has expanded to operate in over 30 countries in the world. In Asia, it operates in Hong Kong, India, and Japan. It was banned in Singapore in 2013 for being a threat to the institution of marriage.

      The company is suggesting that the lawsuit may be held in Vancouver.

      Although its slogan is "Life is short. Have an affair.", it denies that it encourages infidelity. It states on its site:

      Ashley Madison does not encourage anyone to stray. In fact, if you are having difficulty with your relationship, you should seek counseling.

      However, if you still feel that you will seek a person other than your partner to fill your unmet needs, then we truly believe that our service is the best place to start.

      At Ashley Madison, you can communicate with other like-minded adults who may be more sympathetic to your circumstances. 

      The company claims that only communication occurs on the site and no sexual interaction takes place on it.

      Comments

      4 Comments

      ITL Guy

      Aug 29, 2014 at 2:07pm

      Ashley Madison gives legitimate sites a bad name by what they promote and how they promote it. The whole site is based on cheating on spouses - no wonder South Korea has blocked them! I am not in agreement with the cancelation of free speech but in that country they follow their own laws.

      If in fact it was an attempt to block foreign competition then sites like ours which is Canada's largest lifestyle site, Intothelifestyle.com would also be blocked (and we aren't). The big difference is that we are a true lifestyle community and not a money making machine based on fakes, flakes and cheating spouses.

      RUK

      Aug 30, 2014 at 11:43pm

      How is Ashley Madison bad and the Lifestyle isn't? I would never use their site out of disinterest in the subject but come on, so to speak. As if your preferred brand of non monogamy consists only of uncoerced, willing, happy, marriage-status-appropriate, not to mention attractive people. Consenting adults are consenting adults. If some idiots choose to risk being slapped with divorce papers upon sneaking back into the house at five in the morning, that's their own problem - divorce lawyers need to eat too. Loss of freedom to do something legal (albeit in poor taste and not cool) should not be your opportunity to crow. Is it?

      Swinger

      Aug 31, 2014 at 10:45am

      RUK - I think what the above poster was saying is that their site is built for couples to explore together whereas Ashley Madison is designed for people who wish to cheat on their significant other. Two very different platforms in our opinion and we have tried both and dropped using A M because it is full of douches

      RUK

      Sep 1, 2014 at 6:51pm

      Swinger, I get your point, AM is built for cheaters. Cheating is uncool and gross! It would be shocking to find a single person in it who wasn't a douche!

      But it is a non monogamy website. On what grounds would you want to celebrate their blockage while allowing, presumably, other forms of unconventional adult liaison?