chanster

This is really frickin scary:

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/20...nts/index.html

I can't believe that people are actually settling with him and admitting fault in this case..

Basically it means that any store can go after people who complain about their store!

Groucho

It's a bad precident. DVDTalk could be next...this forum has a lot of similiar threads bad-mouthing companies.

Merin

I don't think that the fact that you are settling has anything to do with admitting fault; but as the people quoted said you can't even hope to get you voice heard in court these days unless you have the money to hire Johnny Cochran.

Vampyr

victant

Suckekekekekekekeke! Not cool.

POWERBOMB

Hhmmmm..... Well, I can see the owner being mad because he couldn't respond to those posts, unless he was trying the attachments as the site owner said he was. I'm sure there has to be a way of filtering the attachment out. Shame it has to come to legal battle's, but I can't honestly say that the site owner's or MOD's are as great as the ones we have here.

However, the only story I personally have to contribute is that a year ago a co-worker of mine was terminated from the company because of remarks she made on a site about her bosses. If she sued they have never mentioned it. Seems that the company made it stick. They even told us that their is a difference between our customers making comments and the employees making comments. If they find out your identity you will be let go.

Startide

In Seattle, we've had stores like that - no negative criticism allowed in online BBS postings. Such companies are few and far between, but it illustrates how anonymity and privacy are needed if you want to post an honest opinion for others to know about.

In the future, as more states adopt UCITA, you might find that shrink-wrapped products can and may legally enforce conditions upon you such as (1) no negative reviews (2) no posting of negative comments (3) etcetera. UCITA is a bill sponsored by major corporations that was pushed through your friendly USA gov't with help from lobbyists.

This is why consumers should pay attention to the various laws being passed which encroach upon their rights and privacy.

I wish people really did get the gov't they deserve. In such a case, the people who didn't care about the laws will get those laws. The people who did care about the laws would get a different version that they had wrote in to their representatives about. Unfortunately, with so many people not caring, the legislators have only their consciences and special-interest lobbyist dollars to influence them.

Feneant

What is he suing about, because these people complained? I can see the failing companies streaming through forums now looking for threads that comment on their business and suing everyone to make enough bucks to stay alive.

Either way, this guy probably garanteed that he will never sell online again... here even if people complain, others will still buy, but I'm sure if they came and sued those who complain, no one would touch their store again...

It's just an easy way to get enough money to be able to close shop I say and not about defending his integrity.

lumberjack

It seems like everyone remotely linked to this case is getting slapped with a lawsuit, so I had to stop reading halfway through for fear of my becoming one of them.

dvde

Why's so many people (blank) happy? What a bunch of (blank)? I would fill in the blanks, but I might get (blanked). Where's the free speak in all of this? I wish those people luck.

Heathen

I VERY RARELY agree with their offbeat views, but what I don't understand is why didn't anyone involded as a defendant contact the ACLU? I am sure they would have LOVED to tackle this one...!!!

Abob Teff

The plaintiff is a whacko nutjob. I guess I just added myself to his list.

The defendants' lawyer is a scumbag. He is helping them raise money to pay to himself. As he is a fellow aquarian (or whatever they are) he should be providing his service pro bono. Go ahead criticize me for suggesting this.

The defendants that settled are morons for settling.

I love corporate America. Our company has problems so lets do something irrational and idiotic rather than solve the problem.

skywalker8

It is too bad that these folks couldn't raise a defense fund. They then could have counter-sued.

PhaRO

I'm speechless (although my hands are still workiing) over this. Over the years (last decade in particular) I've seen a decline in customer service. A radio talk show host uses the term Customer No Service, accuately imho. The internet seems like a good place to battle poor customer service. Companies poor business habits get exposed quickly and I think this is great. If this lawsuit is successful I hope it's not the start of a trend. It would be very sad to not be able to read peoples complaints.

Darren Garrison

You know, of course, that the company in question started off as a specialty shop to supply puppies to Satanists for live sacrifice. That's all changed though. Today, they are the number one supplier of puppies AND kitties AND bunnies AND other endearing cute furry animals for various Godless Infidel cults the world over!

(sits back, waits for the lawyers to call)

gcribbs

realizing he just posted in this thread gcribbs begins boarding up his windows waiting to be served at any time


by the way this sucks. however having seen a company settle a suit for 5000 because it would have cost 20,000+ to fight I am not shocked. we were right but the other person had free legal help( ie was an attorney )

LBPound

I'm sure this lawsuit is going to give PetsWarehouse NOTHING but good publicity.

GeoffK

Here's my view on this issue:

- The key firing off point here seemed to be the fact that the forum did not permit the guy to respond or 'defend' himself against the customer complaints. Here we always INVITE the stores to come and do what they can to help address customer complaints

- The site in question didn't seem to understand that this is a HUGE rights issue and they should have talked to the ACLU ASAP!

- I'm sure we'll see more of this stuff, as there aren't enough clear cases to protect online speech...

Abob Teff

Actually, your first point is incorrect Geoff. He was allowed to respond, but he kept insisting on doing so in a manner that was not allowed by their technology and policies. He kept trying to post attachments, which their system does not allow. Had he simply posted like anybody else he would have been heard. It would be like somebody posting that my video store sucked and I tried replying here with an unauthorized referral link for my store (that's the only no-no I can think of here). You'd delete it and tell me to repost without the link (or you would remove the link). If I refused and kept posting it that way, you'd eventually toss me.

I am not a fan of the (don't have) ACLU. But I would agree with you here, they should have called in some big guns instead of relying on the sleezebag who would only help them with fundraisers to pay himself.

greenerdog

I had a frivolous lawsuit filed against me once for over $1 million. When it got to court, the judge bascially laughed at the plaintiff's claims. Too bad I couldn't sue for abuse of the legal system, the guy was in bankruptcy.

Another time (yeah, I attract them like flies to underwater plants), I was doing consulting work to install some experimental medical equipment. When I did the site survey, I realized that the clinic (this is not the client) would not be able to properly handle the equipement, and that it posed a threat to public safety if I installed the equipment.

When I told this to the client, he threatened to sue me unless I installed the equipment. On the one hand, I was worried about someone getting killed by the equipment. On the other was someone threatening to sue.

Being an upstanding kind of guy, I stood my ground and let him know that no court would find me at fault since this was a matter of public safety. I also told him what needed to be done in order to make this a safe installation. After continually trying to convince me that I should install the product and me not blinking, he finally said "there are people out there who will hurt you unless you install the product".

At which point I hung up the phone and called the police. Haven't heard from the guy again.

I think that threatening someone with a lawsuit in order to intimidate them when you have no case should be considered assault.

In my medical story, someone else may have been bullied into installing the equipment, and someone may have been killed. The client was trying to hold a gun to my head in order to get what he wanted. Had someone died as a result of my actions, I doubt that the court would have cared that I was bullied into installing the equipment.

I also think that the "abuse of the legal system" laws should be beefed up a bit.

Startide

I think that it is fairly clear that if it went to court, many of us would win (if not all). But it costs too much money to defend ourselves in court and so the most expedient method is usually to surrender. I had posted before where my real name was known if you did research upon it at other websites. The company lawyer researched the internet to find my real name and sent me a nasty letter.... UGH. So, nowadays, I prefer to hide behind a pseudonym just to add a few more steps into their process.

Norm de Plume

A lot, not just a bit. There are far too many litigious mutants out there looking to make an easy buck from some perceived wrong.

I didn't read the entire story on Salon, but this Petswhatever.com guy is complaining of defamation right? Libel or slander allegations are invariably not entertained if the accused is telling the truth.

This month's Bernard Shifman.

Abob Teff

I like your idea! I wholeheartedly agree that the legal system needs some serious work to put an end to blatant wastes of the public courts' (and hence, taxpayers') time, resources, and money.

hitmenow.com

I complete agree. There are other types of free speech that are protected, but some that are not. For example, parody websites have precedential (sp?) covergage, but when my brother and I were forced to shut down honda.net, protection for "fan" sites was nowhere to be found...

Mr.Finch

After reading that article, I've only got one question for you - did you trade the Honda in?