Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Censorship

PetsWarehouse vs. Mailing List 643

klaun writes "Salon is running a story about a federal suit against members of an Internet mailing list. Seems a company got a bad review on the list and the owner sued the person that said it and everyone who agreed. But the case grew bigger from there, including a suit against the legal defense fund set up to support members of the list being sued and anyone who linked to the defense fund. The ultimate rub of it all is that it basically worked. Most of the defendants have settled." This is a truly bizarre story.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PetsWarehouse vs. Mailing List

Comments Filter:
  • by pgrote ( 68235 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @01:20PM (#3285047) Homepage
    Wow. So if someone thinks my business sucks and they tell people about it I can get rich. Kick ass.

    What I found exceptional about this article is that the guy from Pets Warehouse was representing himself. His costs out of pocket were court fees. It doesn't appear that he paid anyone to serve most of the summons'.

    The most striking question I have is why didn't everyone who was sued band together? I see the reference to the defense fund, but no mention of targeting the suit's validity in front of a court. Wouldn't that be the first step?

    Between this and "recollecting" memories of being abused by priests, one could make a nice living.
  • by grattwood ( 533456 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @01:29PM (#3285123) Homepage
    The mailing list is unmoderated. He (the plaintaif) simply could not figure out how to send plain text e-mail with out attachments.

    He (the plaintaif) is now a regular SPAMMER^H^H^H^H^H^H^H poster to the list. Too bad he has never posted anything about aquatic plants to the list.
  • What damanges?? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MongooseCN ( 139203 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @01:45PM (#3285259) Homepage
    ...alleging libel and defamation and seeking $1 million in damages. He also claimed that he had suffered "$5 million, plus interest" in damages to his "good name and reputation and to his business interests."

    What the heck does that mean? So I guess everyone on the mailing list was about to buy $6 million worth of plants from this store until someone else on the mailing list complained about the store?
  • Nature's defense (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Chris Johnson ( 580 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @01:48PM (#3285278) Homepage Journal
    There's a defense strategy against this in nature, and it doesn't demand that the victim be tougher in any way than the attacker.

    It's called 'mobbing'.

    Crows hate owls and hawks and cannot possibly ever hope to win a fight with one, no matter how many crows there are. So, rather than hiding, if crows see a hawk, they will fly around it at a safe distance and SCREAM at it. Caw! Caw! More crows will come and join. If the hawk goes for any one crow, goodbye crow, and the rest will scream even worse. Result: good luck finding prey with a lot of crows tirelessly screaming around you, hawk!

    Thus, the hawk is 'mobbed' by crows, and that is the defense I mean.

    I read this story in Salon, from a link on CNet. The first thing I thought of was 'slashdot oughta cover this!', and then when I came to Slashdot, it was the top story. Good job, all the people who no doubt all submitted it at once... because nothing quite rivals Slashdot as a 'mobbing site'. Many, many people read Slashdot- many people who are NOT FOND OF BARRATRY.

    The fact is, as things stand right now, legal attacks of this nature ARE beyond what most people can withstand, whether they are justified or not: it's unsurprising that people are forced to settle because they cannot destroy their lives just to be an example.

    That's why 'mobbing', like crows mobbing hawks, is the best answer: if you have no defense and can't possibly win a fight, it CAN still be possible to make things so unpleasant for an attacker that it gives up. I would love to see this 'petswarehouse' guy bankrupt: judging from the Salon story, I think he is a danger to society, all the more because his behavior may be imitated by others realizing, "Hey, you don't HAVE to be a multinational corporation to wreck ordinary people's lives with baseless lawsuits!".

    I am no more capable of this than the original victims were: but I hope I have expressed the 'mobbing' defense adequately that it may turn out useful. People do this already- the point is, rather than being whiny bitches who can't win, they are sounding the alarm in a disorganized but determined way, about a deadly threat.

  • On the main page of his site [petswarehouse.com] he has the Gomez certification logo at the bottom. This in fact is misrepresentation since Gomez certifications have all expired according to Gomez.com [gomez.com].
    Here is the quote.
    "We regret to announce that the Gómez Merchant Certification program has ceased operations as of March 31, 2002. In light of this decision, Gómez will not conduct any further merchant certifications. We will also remove all references to Gómez Merchant Certification other than this notice on Gómez.com on April 1, 2002. Merchants currently certified under the Gómez Certification program should remove all references, logos and/or images of the Gómez Merchant Certification program displayed on their sites or affiliate sites by March 31, 2002.
    Man, what an idiot. Can we sue him for that?
  • One thing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @02:34PM (#3285663)
    How many times have we heard about a person or company being sued by a corporation and settling because they run out of cash? Now there are still the employment costs and stuff but I would at least think there should be public defenders available for liable cases to help take off some of the financial strain. Court cases shouldn't be determined by last man standing.
  • by BLKMGK ( 34057 ) <{morejunk4me} {at} {hotmail.com}> on Thursday April 04, 2002 @02:36PM (#3285679) Homepage Journal
    Google Search finding [google.com]

    Seems there was a time when he thought beating up other companies was okay. Not anymore? Shoe on the other foot now?

  • by yorgasor ( 109984 ) <.ten.shcetirt. .ta. .nor.> on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:24PM (#3286048) Homepage
    If you've read the experiences people posted about doing business with him, you have to wonder if he's really worried about losing business. One guy tried for a couple of years, ordering regularly and only got one order placed. It makes you wonder if he's really trying to make a profit off his business. From the sounds of it, he's driving people to complain about his business so he can spend more time with his self proclaimed hobby: filing lawsuits.

    The aquatic plant growing community is fairly small and relatively easy to keep tabs on the entire community. All he has to do is give enough bad customer service and monitor all the message boards waiting for someone to complain. Then he can move in and start making some real money by filing lawsuits (notice that he doesn't use a lawyer, so he's not losing any money doing so).

    He tries to post messages to defend his honor, but for some reason they were getting blocked. Note here that he is a regular poster to these message boards and is well aware of how to use them. But this time he decides to include MIME attachments to his posts, which I would assume he knows very well would bounce. Now he can claim that they're trying to censor him!! That's worth at least another couple of million dollars!

    From the sounds of things this guy hides behind a pathetic business just to drum up people he can sue and make some real money from. Sounds like one of the lowest life forms out there. It's sad that he's making so many lives miserable, and that he seems to enjoy it. Heck, he's made a career out of it. He's probably riding high now, but it will all come back to haunt him in the end. He who lives by the lawsuit will die by the lawsuit. One way or another, he'll get the reward he so richly deserves.

  • by jheinen ( 82399 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @04:02PM (#3286345) Homepage
    This is merely bizarre. For a truly surreal story, look at the case of Brandi Blackbear. [aclu.org]

    She was suspended from school for successfully practicing witchcraft. She allegedly cast a spell which made a teacher sick. The ACLU is taking it to court.

    Yeah, it's offtopic, but it is interesting.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 04, 2002 @04:59PM (#3286802)
    If someone were to go to a phone booth or dorm phone, avoiding the use of their home phone (which would show up on the WATS billing statement, even if line-blocking or *67 were on), and were that person to dial PetsWarehouse at 1-800-991-3299, they would discover that the call is free to the caller, yet Long Distance to Pets Warehouse.

    If one were to call them a bunch of times, it would cost PetsWarehouse more. If many people were to call them many times, it would be kind of a huge phone bill for them. A phone ringing off the hook a whole lot with no business coming in would really be bad for PetsWarehouse's business, too.

    To do this, of course, would be wrong. Terribly, terribly wrong. Perhaps Congress should create a law that prevent the Internet and the phones from being abused in this manner.
  • Re:watch out /. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by J4 ( 449 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @06:03PM (#3287202) Homepage
    Actually, the reason he's so litigation happy is his son is a lawyer and gets free legal advice. How do I know? Well, about 2 years ago I negotiated with Bob Novack about bringing his webserver in house. He was telling me tales of taking legal action against the co-lo he was using at the time and had plenty of stories about threatening people with legal action.

    This guy is a dick, plain and simple. I was going to give him some serious discount and do the job for $50 an hour. His counter offer?
    $10 an hour. Then to add insult to injury, I started getting spam from him.
  • by APD Mary Roe ( 571270 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @08:28PM (#3288016)
    Why did it work? You can't be serious.

    Because this named not only the original six defendents, but also named John Doe & Mary Roe as defendents.

    You got it, every member of the APD was in legal peril if they opened their mouths. All of us. But, he was waiting. And baiting. And adding hundreds of lines of alleged complaints, in TWO different amendments, anytime anybody said so much as "boo."

    Some of us have homes, families and savings accounts to protect. Make an example out of a few to shut the masses up. Great strategy, win through intimidation. Fortunately, it seems that his strategy is starting to backfire.

    Now the libj.com, Salon.com, /. and even CNN.com, have picked up the story. No doubt other media agencies will pick this up too. I can see it now. Robert Novak versus Bill O'Reilly on FoxCableNews. Nah, that wouldn't be nice to subject Bill O'Reilly to him. Or the suit Novak would lodge because he asked some point-blank questions. But it would be fun to watch Novak squirm while he tries to justify what he's done.

    No, we haven't been sitting down. We are and were outraged as a community. Fighting back requires intelligence and patience. The turtle will win.

Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.

Working...