DENVER -- The identity of the 19-year-old Colorado woman who accused Kobe Bryant of rape has not been disclosed publicly but her name, address and phone number have been posted on numerous Web sites.

Some sites have also wrongly identified another Colorado woman as Bryant's accuser. On Wednesday, that woman asked publicly that her name and photograph be removed from the sites.

"I just want them to know it has hurt me as a person and want them to know it's not right for them to put innocent people on the Internet. And it makes me wonder how many times it's happened before and something needs to be done about it," Katie Lovell told ABC's "Good Morning America."

Both Lovell and the alleged victim are 19, have similar first names, similar hair color and both went to Eagle County High School.

"I was really upset by the whole situation. Like many other girls my age, I am self-concious about myself and going on Web sites and seeing hundreds of people rate my pictures, one through 10, it magnified that by 10. And I wanted to do something, but I didn't know how to fight back," Lovell told ABC's Charlie Gibson.

KOBE BRYANT CASE Slideshow: Who's Who See Sensitive Juror Questions Bryant's Apology DA's Statement What's Next For Kobe? Accuser Will Always Be Known As 'Alleged Victim Bryant Case Flawed From Start Accuser's Statement Kobe Original Statement Wife's Original Statement Chronology Of Events D.A. Explains Dismissal The Ruling Comes Down Legal Experts Disagree On Strength Of Case Rape Victim Advocates Blast Kobe's Defense Team Prosecution Lays Out Case Against Kobe Bryant DA's Original Presser Civil Case Hurt Or Helped? Fair Jury Be Found Should Court Documents Be Published On Web? Race An Issue? Should Sheriff's Accept Bryant T-shirts? Case Goes To Trial: You Surprised? Testimony Change Your Mind? Sexual History Be Admissible? Release Accuser's Name? Kobe's Legacy Tarnished? Whose Story Do You Believe? Discuss Case Court Documents

The two pictures of Lovell that have spread like cyberspace wildfire were apparently lifted from her school's Web site. Not only is the teen misidentified but some pictures have been altered, putting Lovell's face on nude bodies. Other sites are strewn with derogatory comments about Lovell.

Lovell said she found out about her pictures through a friend who was given the photos in an Internet chat room.

"At first ... it didn't really hit me that hard just because it was one site, so I thought, 'We live in the same town so maybe people just mix up the girls.' But after a couple of days it wasn't just on one site anymore. It had spread to several different sites. And a couple of days after that it was a dozen sites and then a couple of days after that it was even more," Lovell told Gibson.

Lovell's mother is worried that the case of mistaken identity can escalate to something worse and she fears for daughter's safety, saying she can't even run simple errands anymore.

"All of sudden they're at Texaco and they're, 'Oh, aren't you the girl?' and it's nonstop," Beth Matthews said in a previous interview.

"I was furious. I'm a helpless mother. My daughter is smeared all over the Internet and you just wonder, 'What can I do?'" Matthews said.

Her family has hired an attorney who has written "cease and desist" letters to the Web sites to get them to remove the photos. If that doesn't work the family will consider court orders and libel lawsuits.

Virtually all American newspapers and news organizations have policies against releasing the identities of sex abuse victims and have not named Bryant's accuser.

Although in the small town of Eagle, with a population of around 3,000, most everyone already knows who she is, 7NEWS reported.

Judge Issues Order Of 'Decorum'

The judge presiding over Bryant's sexual assault case warned reporters that if they publish the name or photograph of the alleged victim, they may not get a seat in his courtroom. Critics said the ruling may be unconstitutional.

As part of a three-page "decorum" order, Eagle County Judge Frederick Gannett on Tuesday outlined the ground rules for media planning to cover Bryant's Aug. 6 hearing and future court appearances.

New York lawyer Floyd Abrams -- a First Amendment expert who represented The New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case -- said the judge's warning about publishing a name or photograph may be unconstitutional.

"That does raise First Amendment issues of the highest order, and I think it is very likely unconstitutional to either limit the press's right to publish the name of the alleged victim, or to punish it by taking away seating privileges if it does so," Abrams told the Rocky Mountain News. "The same is true about publishing a photograph of the victim."

Under Gannett's order, reporters also will be barred from using cell phones and tape recorders and from interviewing people inside the courthouse. No photos or video may be taken of witnesses, potential jurors or Bryant's accuser and her family.

Gannett, who discussed the order with some reporters after its release, said it was intended to prevent a change of venue by stopping the contamination of the jury pool.

Bryant's Lawyers Want Cameras Out

Bryant's lawyers don't want cameras in the courtroom for the Aug. 6 hearing.

They've asked Gannett to reconsider his ruling allowing news cameras in the courtroom, saying they're concerned that the publicity could affect Bryant's right to a fair trial.

Bryant's attorneys Pamela Mackey and Hal Haddon said they weren't given the chance to present arguments before Gannett issued his ruling on cameras last week.

Bryant is expected to be present for the hearing, slthough the judge has told 7NEWS the Los Angeles Lakers star does have the right to request an appearance waiver. However, he said waivers for this kind of preliminary preceeding are extremely rare.

Media lawyers, meanwhile, are asking for sealed court records to be opened. They say many details of the case have already been publicized, some by Bryant's lawyers and some by the district attorney.

"Ironically, at the same time, both the district lawyer and Bryant are opposing the very thing that would permit the public to independently test the veracity of their public relations statements, i.e., unsealing the court file," the lawyers wrote.