Redditors (and Popehat) Versus a Bus Company 153
Techdirt explains the strange story of a lawsuit-happy bus company in Illinois which managed to tick off a cadre of determined redditors by calling them uncomplimentary names in the reddit forums. This all started when a bus passenger, Jeremy Leval, reported unsavory behavior by a company employee (telling an exchange student "If you don't understand English, you don't belong at the University of Illinois or any 'American' University.") and said so online. Besides the name calling on reddit, the bus company threatened the forum moderator with libel charges, and over insults posted by the bus company employees which the moderator had deleted. Further, company owner "[Dennis] Toeppen threatened to sue Leval, saying, 'The attorneys for Suburban Express are reviewing this incident with a view towards filing the appropriate legal action against this meddlesome MBA student.'" Attorney Ken White of Popehat got involved, though, and asked with good effect whether the company had fully considered the Streisand Effect. The strangest part? Toeppen's former involvement as a domain squatter.
Who cares? (Score:0, Interesting)
I really can't bring myself to give a shit about any of this.
Slimy Company (Score:5, Interesting)
So I went to school at Illinois, and still live in C/U. We've all known for years just how bad Suburban Express is, but unfortunately there's enough people that don't know, and enough new people each year, that keep them in business. While it's weird that this made Slashdot, it's nice to see them get the publicity that they deserve.
Re:Contract of Adhesion with sneaky terms (Score:5, Interesting)
If it's the same company that was in a Chicago Tribune article recently, their terms of service make some cell phone services look outright peachy in comparison. Almost like loan sharks on wheels. The company could have two busses going to the same place at the same time, but if you hop on the wrong one the company will go after you for theft. Also no refund for that ticket that's only good for a specific time on that specific bus. So if they screw up you're screwed anyways. I'd also guess the upkeep and maintenance on the vehicles is nothing to talk about either, old rattletrap vehicles with questionable maintenance and comparable to a roach motel on wheels.
Pretty much it's a shady and exploitative company. You'd be better off asking for rides on a campus bulletin board, Craigslist, or hiking with a backpack near a major highway and thumbing it.
Re:Stuff that matters? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on," Paul said. "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash. I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him."
I know the guy... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've done some consulting work for him in the past.
Honestly... He's sort of a jerk sometimes, and he makes some really poor decisions sometimes. But he's honest, and he's not a total moron. He isn't suing people to create some kind of crazy profit center, he's trying to deal with people using forged or incorrect tickets to get on buses. People like to point to his (admittedly a little wacky) terms and conditions and imply that he's suing over stupid shit. He's not, so far as I know. He's suing over people who do stuff like print three copies of the same ticket and get on three different buses that are running the same schedule. This isn't about "socially acceptable behavior", for the most part. (Some of the later stuff, like the defamation claims, was pretty dumb IMO, though.)
And everyone jumps in with some "oh, hey, I know how you could easily solve this!" solution. It's like the thing where, if you spend ten years working with doctors to try to treat insomnia, anyone who hears about this will suggest you cut down on caffeine after dinner. Because, obviously, neither you nor the doctors have ever thought of that!
Yes, there really are reasons that checking passengers against a manifest is at the very least a substantially higher cost than the (fairly small, compared to the user base) amount of fraud. Yes, there are reasons it probably wouldn't be a good tactic at all. It's not that he's too much of an idiot to think of this, it's that he has more information about what is actually happening than those of us who are reading couple-paragraph summaries over the Internet.
Re:Contract of Adhesion with sneaky terms (Score:5, Interesting)
They file the lawsuits in a neighbouring county so that the students are ineligible for legal aid support from the university and thus can't afford to defend themselves - the "fines" are cheaper than the cost of defending yourself.