My interpretation of that "complaint" was that CC was insinuating that the $100 reduction was a CC-only thing and Speedy was responsible for hundreds of thousands of dollars of loss since no other store was dropping their PS3s by $100.

You'll be ok if you don't break the law.

You would have to think that Circuit City has lost at LEAST $15,000 on the negative publicity this has given them.

However, it has been clear this whole time that it isn't about the money. Let's just remembember that this is about Sony being pissed they had their huge E3 announcement taken away from them and now someone must pay.

CC only claims $15K in lost sales or 150 units less than their first projections. Seems like they sure don't move many of those PS3s. That's a fraction of a unit per location for the entire week.
I have no doubt in my mind that all the retailers have been aware of Speedy's posts for some time. This sort of info does get noticed and reported by either employees doing personal surfing or employees paid to pump up their employers business results.
Speedy's posts were 5 days or so earlier than the start of the widest distribution of those ads and once they entered those channels there was no way the price drop was going to remain a secret.

They are claiming an amount in excess of $15K, not claiming only $15K.

This has absolutely nothing to do with money.

They can't exactly go before a judge and say, "We're just trying to out someone who is affecting our relationship with Sony, and we want to find out who this guy is and get to the bottom of who's prematurely releasing our ads so we know who to humiliate and fire."

$15,000 in sales that I don't think they can prove they lost is nothing to a company like Circuit City. Rebuilding trust with their grandmasters is what this is about.

What I don't understand is on page 4, number 10 where CC states that Speedy disclosed highly confidential information proprietary to CC. CC wasn't the only store with that info, so how was it proprietary to just CC? Maybe my understanding of proprietary is off.

As far as receiving damages because of the PS3 price leak, any thinking person could tell you that Sony and MS were going to drop prices on their game systems in the near future. It was just a matter of time. The only thing Speedy leaked was when, not that it was actually going to happen. And futhermore, those price drops have historically happened around E3. The natural assumption is that if there was a price drop it would happen around that time. I just don't buy that CC was damaged because of it. To be honest, compared to the number of people who shop at CC, how many actually saw these threads? I'm not a betting man, but I would almost put money down that it's just a fraction of a percentage. In fact, the only reason I personally found DVDTalk is because on a whim I went to Gamespot looking for info on the Wii and saw an article on Speedy. The story probably did increase Speedy's popularity, but not to the extent that CC is claiming that it 'spread like wildfire'.

Lastly, I never profited from Speedy's posts personally, but I did check them. I was really only looking for when BB would run a no interest deal on computers. However, when it comes down to the ethics of it, if Speedy was obtaining the ads illegally then really he has no ethical grounds to stand on. However, ethics and law are two different things. I don't buy into CC's complaint. It sounds like whining to me. If it were a simple cease and desist I think I'd be on board (but wouldn't like it), but the damages they are claiming are a hoot to me.

Why didn't Sony just make the announcement without a CC advertisement? I remember with the price drops (Xbox, Nintendo) in May of 2002 it took a couple of weeks before the ads caught up to the newer prices. Retailers just adjusted their in-store prices immediately.

I highly doubt it. I would be very interested in seeing CC's (or BB's, or anyone's) actual numbers on pricematching/price adjustments after the purchase. Most "normal" people, once they're home and the item is unpacked, don't follow the prices like a hawk like some of us. If they're in the store two weeks later, the most the 'average' person would do would say "Well crap, I paid ten bucks more for that next week" and move on. Similar to mail in rebates--probably 75% of people who bring that form home, lose it on their desk or in their trash, and half of the rest forgot they ever send it in.
CC--or any other retailer--isn't really in business for their customers. They're in business to make money for themselves, and tangentially, their stockholders/employees. if everyone did a price adjustment *every time* one applied, that policy would be changed before the year's out.
It's not good publicity for a company's future, cheaper prices to be released early, and I honestly can't see how anyone who thinks about it from a business standpoint would think it is (unless they're using the cliche'd "no publicity is bad publicity").
Yes, anyone knows MS and Sony would drop prices. Here's a tip: they're going to drop prices again. Not a problem. If I said "on 11/01/07 both consoles will drop 75 bucks across the board", based on "insider" knowledge I had, that would be a problem.
If Speedy "stole" the information, I think posting it was wrong. IANAL, so I don't know if it was "illegal". I have no affiliation with CC other than as a mostly-satisfied customer, and I'm not a fan of the stereotypical lawyer (though I know it's primarily the bad ones who get the publicity.) I think Speedy and the sites are getting hammered too hard, but I don't think he was in the right.

And another thing, CC is going to all this trouble for a measly $15k? I understand the wording in the legal document is that is may be greater than this amount, but obviously their records show they may have lost somewhere around this number. If they'd lost more and could justify it with some financial analysis then they would have claimed a greater loss. It just doesn't make sense to me that a company whose CEO's base salary for FY2007 was $894k and almost $12.5 billion in net sales for the same period is quibbling over $15k. Granted, the company did post a loss for FY2007, but a measly $15k wouldn't make any difference for a loss of over $8 million. I still contend that a simple cease and desist would have probably had the same effect as the current legal action, and it would kept CC from looking like the big corporate bully. Like many others, I just question the business acumen of the management at CC...

Are you saying the folks in this forum (including myself) are not 'normal'??? ;)

Actually you've done more to prove my point than refute it. When news of the PS3 price drop was leaked---who held off on spending that extra $100? The folks in these forums. And those are the same ones who would have seen the price drop after July 15th and went back in for a price adjustment. A hundred bucks is a lot different than your example of saving ten. The bargains forum has people indicating they're going to Best Buy next week to get $3 taken off their DVD purchase of a week ago.

People who don't follow forums such as this and were not aware that the price was going down still went into stores and bought the PS3 the week before the drop. And yes, you're right, some of those probably didn't go back to get credit on their purchase.

I stand by my original claim that Circuit City claiming they lost thousand of dollars in sales that week doesn't make sense.

That's a good question for Sony. I'm guessing a mix of ego and stupidity (on sony and CC's part). I also find it hard to believe that CC was so clueless about the internet and the forums that they didn't think that there was a good chance of the ad being leaked. This is just another example of a company thinking it's still 1995 and they can keep secrets like this from being leaked world-wide.

Granted, the PDF won't load for me and IANAL, but it would be my guess that $15k is the cutoff for some penalty/degree of crime.

I got arrested as a kid for shoplifting a CD (no, I'm not proud :lol: ), while a friend I was with got caught with two. My theft was under $15 and therefore a Misdemeanor 1 (I think that was the charge), so it had a lighter penalty than his. Obviously a completely different level, but it wouldn't surprise me if the dollar amount meant something.

I am now officially NEVER buying anything from Circuit City again (and I feel bad because I helped endorse their “reign of terror” by buying Season 6 of Tales from the Crypt from them last night).

Last night, when I went over there to get TftC, I was walking through the HD-DVD/TV section out of boredom and there were a TON of Supernatural: Season 2 sets already put out, just sitting there, casually waiting for someone like you or me to pick it up and take it home. I sat on it for a day 'cause I needed to think about whether or not I wanted to get Season 2. After a while, I thought, "of course I did. There were some great episodes last season."

So, I went back today, the ton were still sitting on the shelf, I get up to the register (at Customer Service, of course, because they NEVER have anyone working at the registers. You'd think with all the people they had working there that they'd have at least ONE person at a real register), I pull out my credit card just as the guy scans it...

And...

The computer goes and screws it up for me (this is Circuit City. Did you honestly think there was gonna be a happy ending), revealing that it's not supposed to be out until 9/11. Of course, those idiots (and I say it with the coldest intent there is because those people have been screwing it up with me for the last year and a half with a crappy TV they sold me) took the copy back and were all like, "Sorry, we can't sell this to you," and that old song and dance.

This is why I like Best Buy, Target, and even K-Mart a HELL OF A LOT better than Circuit City. At least when they fuck up and put out something on the shelves early, you get to buy it. I didn’t have to put up with this at all when I got Sleepy Hollow and INLAND EMPIRE a week in advance. It was a smile, “did you have a good day,” ring, money exchange, and a pleasant evening at home.

rotfl

Looks like this thread is pulling the inner "lawyer" side of the members here.

Whew, I never knew that DVDTalk members are that knowledgable with the LAW!

And for thsoe who post that they will stop buying at CC... I highly doubt it...

So, when you are at the theater and they run that clip
which accuses every paying member of the audience of being a pirate
and says "you wouldn't steal from a store..."
you can say, "yes, yes I would Aaaargh!"

Sooo... can't Speedy log into his CAG and DVDtalk accounts and change all of the info to a fake name, city, and email? Then they can't find him...

Why? I haven't shopped there in years. It's a very easy store to avoid IMHO.

None of that information has to be true. For all we know, every name and location entered here is totally made up.

But even if we don't give real info, they can track us by IP address, and get some details of where we're posting from and who we are.

apparently yours isnt an isolated incident. when the foo fighters last album was due for release, they had it on the shelves about a week early. i tried to purchase it, and the same thing happened. "we cant sell this to you, sir" well then, little register jockey, who put it on the shelves? i cant stand incompetence. needless to say, even tho they had the best price on it (IIRC) i diddnt buy it there.

Has DVDTalk responded yet?

Yes we have.

We're formally legally represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.EFF.org and they've responded to the subpoena on our behalf.

On the continued advice of our counsel, I've been advised not to comment on a current and open case as such comments can be used in reference to that case.

Needless to say we continue to pursue the absolute best options available to us through the legal process. With the EFF.org representing us we've got the absolute best and most informed legal team for this issue.

Thanks again everyone for your continued support and patience.

I'm also closing this thread for length (the forum hates threads over 400 posts). So please feel free to start a part II.