Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government News

Quepasa.com Settles Whatshappenin.com Lawsuit 145

Posted by timothy from the despedido-con-prejudicar dept.
Bob Roberts writes: "It looks like the frivolous lawsuit brought against quepasa.com by Whatshappenin.com is finally over: the case has been settled by Quepasa.com. What does 'dismissed with prejudice' mean?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Quepasa.com Settles Whatshappenin.com Lawsuit More

Quepasa.com Settles Whatshappenin.com Lawsuit

Comments Filter:

  • Right... it's about trademarks (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Yes, you read him right. This case means nothing legally. Much like the MS case--if they settle, the findings of fact effectively won't exist and can't be used in the class-action suits.

    However, the outcome was pretty obvious. Trademarks are compared *in English*, so whatshappenin.com and quepasa.com are the same, and quepasa.com would have been in violation--but only if the court somehow found that whatshappenin.com was a fairly unique term and not merely a cliche describing what the company did.

    Moral of the story: Don't try to get away with using translations of names like "Microsoft" or "SlashDot" as you can be sued for that and will almost certainly lose, since there's much precedent there. If you have the money to fight it, though, feel free to call your graphical interface "Windows" since that's just a description and you can likely win, given enough money. Don't try to get away with "Windows 2000" or "Windows NT" though.
  • Dude. It's called comity. Look into sometime before you go courting lawsuits in other countries. With a treaty, they domesticate the judgment. Now, you got the local sheriff at the door to enforce the foreign judgment recognized by treaty as legit.

  • Re:dismissed with prejudice (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I am sorry, I mistyped my last post. Ignore the "a lawyer" at the start. Thank you.
  • Microsoft: "Adoptar, Extender, Extinguir"

    Sounds catchy, I like it. Kinda like "veni vidi vici".

    Beats the hell out of "Hasta dónde quiere llegar hoy?", anyhow...

    Maybe I'll just try posting stories from one site to the other for a while... Wait for the "Biotech companies giving Universities money for evil patents" story, I guess... :)
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].

  • rofl (Score:1)

    by Mr Z ( 6791 )

    ...wish I had mod points to mark this funny!

    --Joe
    --
  • ....and wazzzzzuuuuuup.com [wazzzzzuuuuuup.com] is probably already 0wn3D by Anheuser-Busch.
  • As the dude above pointed out, it's not a precedent because it's not a ruling. This was a settlement, so whenever something is dismissed (with or without prejudice) then there's no ruling, or judge's decision on record, so there's no precedent to cite in future cases. A settlement is a way to avoid a decision and to avoid setting a precedent (in some cases).
  • Moderators, mod this baby up, this needs to be preserved for all time.

    Wet myself, were talking actual droplets of urine here :)
  • IANAL, but I always though that "without prejudice" meant that the deal had no effect on future legal wheeling and dealing. i.e. it would mean the settlement in this case did not effect any future legal wheeling and dealing. "With prejudice", would presumably mean that the settlement in this case would affect any future dealing between the two companies involved.

  • Ahhhh... ahora que se siente bueno!
  • Que Pasa is a culture of discourse in much the same way that Ca Va is not Whatshappenin. Okay, if they were similar looking, there might be a struggle here, but the Que Pasa site is so completely superior to the whats happenin site that it would be terribly insulting to me if I were accused of being anything like whatsheppenin.

    Besides, it is a Spanish language site, wherein the vid clip of the reactions over Jennifer Lopez' dress were all in Spanish.

    Did someone say that quepasa.com settled?

  • I don't know how this relates, but I recently heard that somewhere in the world recently a judge ruled that you can't agree to get injured.

    I'm sketchy on the details but it went something like this: Two guys in a bar agreed to go outside and fight. One guy got pretty badly injured in the fight. A case resulted, went to court, and the judge said that although they agreed to fight, and that the nature of a fight is for people to hurt eachother, you can't agree to get injured.

    Anyhow, I thought it was interesting.

  • Yes, "nolo" refers to that, but it also means so much more: "We wanted a short domain name that can be easily remembered and associated with law, but lexis-nexis was already taken".

  • Trademarks are compared *in English*

    Ok, everyone remember the Nova incident in Spanish speaking countries?

    Does this mean that I can't go around selling cars under a name of "Doesn't Go"? Or does that just describe the actions of the product?

    :-)


    Steven Rostedt
  • Interesting article. My first tale of this story was back in my high school Spanish class. I took 4 years of Spanish, then went to Spain to learn that 4 years of high school Spanish doesn't cut it :-)

    The story as I heard it, was that the car sold poorly. And as I remember (I'm sure there are enough Spanish speaking /. readers to correct me) is that "no va" may not be the most grammatically correct, but does actual translate to be "Doesn't go".


    Steven Rostedt
  • It is not wrong. The *judge* has the final decision... hence res judicata. Judges aren't supposed to tell plaintiffs their arguements are full of @#$&.

    -sid
  • Actually, no.

    It means the case was pre-judged. New circumstances cannot be entered later. The case WILL NOT BE allowed another trial unless another judge throws the original finding of prejudice excessively premature.

    Catch some reruns and it will make sense. :-)

    -sid
  • Uhh. No.

    The case CAN be pursued... the problem is getting the decision of one judge changed by another. Few judges like to make "precedence" like that. It's a can of worms.

    It's the same reason sharks don't eat lawyers -- "Professional Courtesy."

    :-)

    -sid

  • Not catchy. Not even a little.

    :-)

    -sid
  • YES!! We need better trolls! These trolls suck!
  • Ja Ja JA JA JA JA!!!!
    Muy bueno! hasta la conch de tu vieja.. JA JA JA! :-)
  • Truth or fiction? The world may never know. :)

    Found a more comprehensive page on the same subject at this location [snopes.com] that is probably where the information I originally remembered came from. And, since this is slipping off topic rather fast, I'll stop there. True or not, the story does have a useful moral. :)
  • Well, this story is in a lot of college business books, but it's also on a lot of urban myths pages.. for example, here [urbanmyths.com].

    I also seem to remember a debunking page that mentioned that "no va" wouldn't be correct Spanish, but that could be faulty memory (my choice in high school was French :)
  • I think a more common translation is "no contest."

    yeah. thanks :)

    --

  • nolo? (Score:1)

    by jesser ( 77961 )
    hmm, i wonder if the site name "nolo" is short for "nolo contendere", a legal plea that neither admits guilt nor denies the charges (i think it translates as "i con't contend that")

    --

  • Dismissed with extreme prejudice.

  • I wonder if the owner of a similiar domain (i.e. whatsgoingon.com or some such) is gettting a similiar idea and thinking about suing whatshappenin.com. I don't see why not ...

    -ac
  • I don't normally reply to people's .sig lines, but since it's vaugely relevant (what w/ the topic being a court ruling):

    "The state was indeed [...] the gendarme, but the kind of gendarmes who think they are somebody [...] and the capitalist class got rid of it [and replaced] it with a government of its own choosing [...] at all times under its control." - Errico Malatesta, "L'Anarchia"

  • >Beats the hell out of "Hasta dónde quiere llegar hoy?", anyhow...

    I don't know..

    Microsoft guy: "Hasta dónde quiere llegar hoy?"
    Me: "Hasta la concha de tu vieja"

    That's funnier in spanish..

    --

  • Hmm... not sure.

    You see, to me the real excitement of slashdot is the epic battle between order and chaos. The moderators are of course on the front lines. I think the reason I am so enthralled is that it is all so tragic -- surely it clear to everyone by now that the moderators are utterly doomed. Their cause is lost, but each day they sally forth once more to defend a shrinking scrap of land where 'meaning' and 'civility' still reign. I am filled with a dread fascination, and cannot turn away. But today, this fool stumbled out and disgraced the noble field where so many have perished in vain. Thus did I become wonderly wroth, and sought to deliver unto him a royal dis, although I knew my skill would not be equal to the task. My fingers flew over the keyboard, and my post was shot forth, alone. The rage cleared from my brain, and I was free from slashdot, for a time. For these reasons, I do not know what was intended, but if I had to guess, I'd probably choose #2.

  • Wonder if the moderator will have the guts to tell me why he did it - I guess not.

    I am not that moderator, but I doubt he or she will mind my explaining this to you. There is not much point in your responding to a post that everyone can see is a piece of trash. But if you do respond to that post, complaining that it is so abusive and offensive, why on earth would you give a response which is just as abusive and offensive?! I quote:

    I suppose I shouldn't reply to such a dickweed troll but take your finger out of your ass and think...

    CmdrTaco has given you the privilege of expressing this opinion. But he has alloyed this privilege with moderation, to scourge the kind of pointless abuse of which you and 'TRoLL.' are such shining examples. Perhaps you are complaining that the moderator should have marked down the parent post first. That is utterly moot. By adding to the total volume of stupid, worthless flamebait, you are making the moderators' job much harder. To complain about their noble work, just after you have thwarted it, makes you nothing less than a hypocrite.

    Best regards,
    Tuxedo Mask

  • Actually, I think the lawsuits will erupt between: whazzzaaaappp.com whazzaaaappp.com whazzzaaappp.com etc., etc.,... they'll tie up the country's courts in litigation for years. :)
  • It good to see that these things, for the most part, are being dealt with properly by the courts. I imagine it will take some time for "every" fivilous lawsuit to get processed but ultimitatly if things go well, then that will be the end of it.

    Think of it as an experiment in neural networks, once the cells have time to understand what inputs produce what outputs the system stabalizes itself and continue to produce correct answers...

  • Maybe this will set a precedent for future lawsuits of this type. Anyone up for registering howsithanging.com to see if anyone sues them.
  • I think that barrapunto.com has a better color scheme than slashdot. OTOH, the stories seem older....

  • Here's the dictonary entry under, filed under with predjudice [nolo.com].

    It took me a few tries to find it, too.



    --
  • That's the opposite. Eheheh. Silly me. Told you IANAL.
  • IANAL, but, Dismissed with prejudice means that the claimant
    cannot reassert those claims in the future.

    For an example of this term see What I found using Google [nk.com].

    :-only kona in my cup-:

    :-robert taylor-:
  • Use Babelfish and find out for yourself :P
  • Actually it is more of a "rm -rf /lawsuit" Should be moderated up for accuracy of analogy by a attorney-geek!
  • So how do you say "first post" in Spanish

    There don't seem to be any first-posting assholes on that site... :)
  • (i think it translates as "i con't contend that")

    I think a more common translation is "no contest."

  • In spanish Slashdot = Barrapunto Chau!
  • I actually found the quote in the Principia Discordia, and found it amusing. Thus it became my .sig
  • read above ...

    ok and finally, seventh!!! ... lol

    anonymous cowards are exactly that...
  • rayaverticalpunto.org

    lol!
  • If I'm not mistaken, "dismissed with prejudice" means that this complaint cannot be filed again by the plaintiff against the defendant over the same incident.

    The usual disclaimers about what my profession is and is not apply.

  • Vierto arenas calientes abajo de mis pantalones!

    Anomalous: inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected
  • I mean god damn, it's not like it already hasn't been said 80 times. I know I'll get modded down for this but I don't give a fuck. Go ahead. m0D m3 d0wN. fUcK d4 m0DzZzZ.
  • I was not aware of the French Branch. It makes my point even more valid.

    Mattel has locations in China, and they can try to claim that the China location is hurt by the US based website.

    But on your point, doesn't MIT and Harvard have exhange programs with schools in France? Is that enough to cover them?

  • There have been cases where because the site was accessible to citizens of that state.

    The web messes up traditional jurisdictional arguments. What about stores with no physical presence? Or companies that have 6 employees that are spread out over the world?

    Have cablemodem, will telnet.

  • Did you forget, the French government brought suit against a university in Georgia for not having the website in French?

    What about the DeCSS case? It's in California one day, then New York, then Norway.

    Do you define lamer as one who sticks up for their rights?

    I think you may project oo much.

  • In some settlement agreements, a dismissal with prejudice is part of the agreement.

    In a lawsuit (after filed), the dismissal with prejudice prevents it from being brought again.

    When you settle, you want the case over. If you don't dismiss, the case could continue.

  • I forgot that is the other reason for a settlement, to avoid a precedent.

  • It trashes the case and keeps it from working ever again.

  • Did you forget, the French government brought suit against a university in Georgia for not having the website in French?

    If we talk about hte same case then it is irelevant of this story because this was an American university that had an implementation in France and the website of their location in France was only in English (which is understandable for an university in which you will only speak English), including the on-line enrolment forms which is against the French law that state that enrolment forms must be available in French.

    The case as you depict here is misleading and make us believe that it is "these stupid French suing an American University located in Georgia (maybe the original one was here but the targeted one was the France-located one), hey why not sue the MIT, Harvard, and every other non-French university over the world". I don't say that you said that, just that the way you said what you wanted to say was meaning that.

  • There have been cases where because the site was accessible to citizens of that state.

    Do you mean inside the USA, that is totally different than between two distinc countries, in the first case there is far more likeliness to make a ruling valid across states, because they are part of a global country and share the same constitution, than to make a ruling valid between different countries.

    The web messes up traditional jurisdictional arguments.

    It sure does, but this still doesn't make a foreign judgement automatically apply locally. They can sue you in China and get you condemned there (but this would really be hard to do so, given that apart from your travel here you don't have any relation to China) but if they try to make it apply in the States they will have as much a hard time as doing it directly.

    What about stores with no physical presence?

    They have a physical presence, just the buyer don't go to this place. Any society is registered in at least a country (well, with the exception of the illegal societys like the mafia) and that is with this country's law that they can be most directly be attacked; other countries may judge against a foreign e-commerce website (no physical store in that country) but to make it apply in the e-commerce country they need to use an international treaty and even then they cannot use it to bypass the constitution.

    If I understand correctly what you are thinking that would mean that Amazon (wrong example, let's say Barnes and noble) cannot sell a pamphlet anti-Chinese because a Chinese court will censure it, make it illegal and Amazon would then be restrained from selling it outside China. As you can see this is completely crazy, the Chinese court can restrain them to not selling it in China but they cannot restrain them from selling it in another country (say, Taiwan).

    Or companies that have 6 employees that are spread out over the world?

    I don't understand, do you mean that the company could then sue you in each 6 countries? Well, they could try but they could not make the ruling apply in the States anyway (because of th e1st amendment).

  • The right way to say it would be "diagonal punto" or "diagonalpunto". although most spanish speaking people would probably say "slashpunto" since "slash" is rarely translated (at least where I live, Panama)
  • are you selling your services?
  • Flamebait

    You've got someone openly displaying swastika's and I'm the one who's FLAMEBAIT?

    Well well well. Moderators are scared that I said something against the rules huh - or perhaps someone out there thinks that opening being anti-semitic/pro nazi is acceptable huh?

    MMM Says a lot. Wonder if the moderator will have the guts to tell me why he did it - I guess not.
  • We've been through this the first time the story about the lawsuit was posted.

    barra vertical punto is completely off, barra diagonal punto is the closest thing in spanish.

    barra punto

    diagonal punto

    and even

    slash punto

    are used in some places

  • Basically, if I understand what you're saying, this outcome means absolutely nothing legally. It sets no legal precedent, meaning that future cases similar to this will not be able to use this outcome in court as a precedent.

    Now I have a question: Was this a case about domain names, or about trademarks? I couldn't imagine that this would be about domain names. From the articles, it seems to be about trademarks, not domain names. It's quite common now for a domain name to happen to also be a trademark, say, Amazon.com...

  • the phrase "what's happening" is even original. Suing somebody for translating a common phrase is the stupidest thing i've ever seen.
  • I wouldn't say suing them is the stupidest thing I've ever seen -- that would be companies trademarking/copyrighting/etc. those phrases. That's why today, Microsoft 'owns' the phrase "Where do you want to go today?" and Paramount owns the phrase "Make it so" (!). This is just one of those stupid stupid things companies do. Err... do I have to pay them now, since I used those phrases? Hey guys, whatshappenin?!
  • Que pasa is not a translation, the phrase exists on the spanish languaje natively. "Harina de avena caliente en los pantalones" now that is a translation , a very stupid and senseless one, but a translation in fact.

  • Re:Dismissed with Prejudice. (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It's a good way for the judge to "honorably" state their disgust, which is probably the case here.
    This is wrong. A dismissal with prejudice means that the the principle of res judicata may apply as to matters actually litigated (as opposed to tangentially exposed) by the case.
    A dismissal without prejudice is often made for clerical mistakes in the form of the pleading. Parties can refile the lawsuit (and start the clocks for answers, cross motions, etc., all over).
    So, it just means that as to matters explicitly raised in the pleadings, or fairly before the court (jurisdictions differ at to what this means), the current dismissal has the force of res judicata--"that which is already decided".
    Oh, yes. Fuck moderation and all that.

  • Simple illustration (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Consider two people, John Q. Slashdotter and Anonymous Troller.

    Suppose that John Q. Slashdotter pours hot grits down the pants of Anonymous Troller, scalding A. T. in an intensely painful and personal way.

    Suppose that A. T. feels injured and files suit for damages against John Q. Slashdotter.

    Scenario #1: John Q. Slashdotter shows up in court and says "hey look! this suit is against John Q. Slashdaughter, and that is not me!" The judge might give A. T. leave to amend the complaint, or the judge might dismiss the claim without prejudice.

    Scenario #2: At the first hearing, John Q. Slashdotter produces a letter from A. T. that says "please pour hot grits down my pants. Thank you". The letter goes on to say "I am aware of the possibility of intensely painful and personal injury resulting from grits pouring activity. I hereby forever release and hold harmless John Q. Slashdotter from liability for any such injury. Thank you." What's more, the letter is signed by A. T. and the signature is notarized.

    In Scenario #2, the judge is going to ask A. T. "what's up with this letter?" And if A. T. doesn't have something really compelling to say at this point, the judge is likely to dismies the case with prejudice.

    In other words, "without prejudice" means the judge is saying: "you may have a case but you aren't making it right. Come back and do things right and I'll listen to you." And "with prejudice" means the judge is saying: "you do not have a valid case. Go away, and don't come back".

    IANAL, but I did defend myself in a civil suit once against a Real Lawyer. The judge dismissed the case with prejudice.

  • I've given up on Babblefish. www.freetranslation.com [freetranslation.com] does a much better job. Running barrapunto.com through FreeTranslation [freetranslation.com] gives a pretty readable result.


    ...phil
  • IANAL, but I did defend myself in a civil suit once against a Real Lawyer. The judge dismissed the case with prejudice.

    Cool, can you give us any details? Such as why your opponent didn't have a valid case? And/or what I'm more interested in: how did you go about researching how to defend yourself? What with my interest in cryptography research plus the various lawsuits that have been brought against people doing various crypto-related stuff (Phil Zimmerman, Dan Bernstein, and Jon Johanssen come to mind...), this may be of direct personal interest to me someday. Of course, it might not, and I hope it never is...

    P.S. If I misspelled anybody's name in this post (especially Jon Johanssen, as he's the one who I'm least certain about how to spell his name), please correct me.
    -----
    The real meaning of the GNU GPL:

  • You are out of order here.

    This person has a personal crusade. It may be important to other people on Slashdot or it may not. The fact that he has chosen to put it into his .sig means it's important to him.

    Do you have the right to tell him what he should call important ? Can you set other people's priorities ?

    So what if you get tired of reading the same sig every time he posts. All the people on /. who use sigs force you to do the same. You can just turn off sigs in your preferences.

  • The next big domain battle is going to be over "whazzzaaaappp!!!".com, anyhow. Look for a big lawsuit between Annheuser-Busch and all the folks who set up variations on the whazzzaaaappp name in multiple languages.

    (but imagine the ads!)


    - -Josh Turiel
  • The judge hates both parties, holds the lawyers in contempt of court, and really, really wanted to adjourn. :P
  • IFAIK

    This does prevent future claims. Prejudice is used to prevent "me too" cases. That situation is what class-action suits are for.

    A case dismissed "Without Prejudice" allows new evidence to be ADDED to the original, giving the plaintiff(s) a chance to build their case. In these cases, the judge is telling the plaintiff that they're probably right, but for the wrong reasons.

    -sid
  • That's a surprizing quote. Everything I've heard of Galbraith makes him sound like a major cheerleader for the state. What is this from? Maybe I should finally get around to reading some of his stuff.
  • You know I got to thinking about it and it reminded me of the feeling I have when I am wiping a windows partition and installing linux to it. I format that bad oscar with prejuidice.

    :-)
  • It's not a Precedent. It may apply to the parties in the case, but that is it!

    A precedent is a ruling that can/is used to make other rulings. Usually this is from an appeals level courts. In Mass, if the Mass Appeals court or the Mass SJC makes a decision, it applies to other cases in Mass. Sometimes, other courts would look at thoses cases for advice. Generally the closer the court to the jurisdiction, the more weight given the decision.

  • This was a publicity stunt. No mention was made about the terms of the settlement. It's possible they just got together, threw together bs lawsuit and then dismissed it in order to get some publicity. __ Then again what the hell do I know?
  • was not aware of the French Branch. It makes my point even more valid.

    I don't think so, if they didn't have any location in France this really would be an utterly stupid lawsuit, but if they did sue was because of the foothold, because they had something in their juridiction.

    Let's say that I create a company in France that sell DeCSS (the true one) modified (under the GPL of course) to be a player/recorder. If the MPAA sues me under the DMCA in America while I am not selling it or otherwise having any relation to America they can bugger of whatever they want because in France we don't have the DMCA, we can reverse engineer for compatibility reasons and we have rights to fair use just like you did a few years ago in the States (with nuances probably), so the DeCSS is completely legal.

    Of course they could try to sue me in France under a French law but not under an American law. More exactly they could sue me under the DMCA in America but since I don't have any relation with America the ruling don't have any teeth to bit me.

    Mattel has locations in China, and they can try to claim that the China location is hurt by the US based website.

    No, with their location in China they can sue the guy in China for his website but they will have a hard day to make the judgement valid in the States by using international treaties because these treaties hold no power on the constitution, so he keeps his free speech. in the worst case the guy can be condemned in China and then must avoid going there, which is already bad, but they cannot touch him in the States from China, otherwise it would mean that I don't have the right to free speech because China doesn't give this right to me, so if I am condemned by a Chinese court this takes away my right to free speech.

    But this work the other way round, Mattel has got a implantation in France, which means that I can sue them under French law (I'm French) for something that may be legal in the States but illegal in France, they still can do it in the States (it's legal over there) but they couldn't do it anymore in France (because the French judge say they can't).

    But on your point, doesn't MIT and Harvard have exhange programs with schools in France? Is that enough to cover them?

    Since I am not aware of any implantation of a branch of the MIT or Harvard in France they have absolutely nothing to fear from French laws.

    An exchange program isn't the same because when a student make an exchange program between a French university and a foreign (for the French) one he is enroled in the French university in France and he is enroled in the foreign university in whatever country this university is, not in France, so this is the same case as if I went to the States and got enroled to the MIT (I can dream ;)), I could not complain of the lack of French enrolment forms.

    Well, at least that's how I understand things, but if the MPAA can sue me in France (or England given that that's were I currently am) over the DMCA because I have got DeCSS on a French webpage [multimania.com] then this would be called ingerence.

  • Re:Slashdot en español (Score:3)

    by pb ( 1020 ) on Thursday March 02, 2000 @09:05PM (#1229352)
    Oh man, that's fun to read in babelfish.

    "You have not entered like user. You can enter or Create an account. If stuffed your name and your password in addition to the fields Subject and Commentary, you can send your commentary without using a galletita (cookie). If you do not enter, your commentary will be put to name of Asshole Without Name"

    Yep, that sounds about right. ;)
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].

  • dismissed with prejudice (Score:3)

    by mattdm ( 1931 ) on Thursday March 02, 2000 @07:41PM (#1229353) Homepage
    It means that the case is finally decided and the matter can't be pursued in any court. There's more on Nolo [nolo.com] (but I couldn't find the dictionary entry mentioned; perhaps I'm just up too late...).

    --

  • Dismissed with Prejudice. (Score:3)

    by sid crimson ( 46823 ) on Thursday March 02, 2000 @07:34PM (#1229354)
    This means this case can never be brought up again... even if new circumstances are uncovered.

    It's a good way for the judge to "honorably" state their disgust, which is probably the case here.

    Anyone know how to say "Slashdot" in Spanish?? :-)

    -sid

  • Dismiss with prejudice (Score:3)

    by MalaclypseJr ( 134881 ) on Thursday March 02, 2000 @07:36PM (#1229355) Homepage
    What would that be? dismiss -9?

  • Domain name infringement (Score:4)

    by TheDawgter ( 152771 ) on Thursday March 02, 2000 @09:10PM (#1229356)
    Dear Sirs/Madames; This is our last warning. As the owner of the trademarked domains "ot.com", the workaholics annonymous website, and "t.com", the Boston Harbor Authority web presence, we insist that you cease and decist using our registered trademarks in your domain name, "slashdot.com". If you fail to comply with our demand, we will be forced to defend our trademark through other means. Sincerely, R. E. Dickulus

  • Slashdot en español (Score:5)

    by mlc ( 16290 ) on Thursday March 02, 2000 @08:12PM (#1229357) Homepage
    Anyone know how to say "Slashdot" in Spanish?? :-)

    There's a site barrapunto.com [barrapunto.com] which appears to be a spanish slashdot-esque thingy and uses the Slash code and has lots of people posting using the name "Pendejo Sin Nombre"... you get the idea.

  • Misinformation at the speed of light (Score:5)

    by alkali ( 28338 ) on Thursday March 02, 2000 @09:13PM (#1229358)
    Some of the comments above scare me. Here's the real scoop:

    When a case is "settled," as the linked article tells us that this case was, it almost always means that the plaintiff -- the person or entity who brought the case -- agreed to voluntarily dismiss their case with prejudice in exchange for something they want, often money. Dismissal "with prejudice" means the plaintiff can't refile the case. (If the plaintiff were able to refile the case, it would make the settlement worthless to the defendant.)

    A voluntary dismissal is usually entered automatically by the clerk of the court. A dismissal in connection with a settlement therefore does not reflect any judge's opinion on the merits of a case, and has no value as precedent.

    The following things are not true or are nonsensical:

    • It's a good way for the judge to "honorably" state their disgust, which is probably the case here (the case wasn't ruled on, it settled, and even a dismissal by a judge does not express disgust for the lawsuit)
    • The *judge* has the final decision... hence res judicata. Judges aren't supposed to tell plaintiffs their arguements are full of @#$& (this case was settled, but in the real world judges quite properly throw out cases all the time before juries hear them, see Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 56 for details of how this happens in federal courts)
    • 'prejudice' here means a pre-trial decision (as before, there was no decision, and anyway the term has nothing to do with trials)
    • It['s] good to see that these things, for the most part, are being dealt with properly by the courts (the court had nothing to do with it here, it settled)
    • The case WILL NOT BE allowed another trial unless another judge throws the original finding of prejudice excessively premature (there was no first trial, there was no "finding" of prejudice)
    • The case CAN be pursued... the problem is getting the decision of one judge changed by another. Few judges like to make "precedence" like that (the judge made no decision here; beyond that, I have no idea what this guy means)
    • This does prevent future claims. Prejudice is used to prevent "me too" cases. That situation is what class-action suits are for. A case dismissed "Without Prejudice" allows new evidence to be ADDED to the original, giving the plaintiff(s) a chance to build their case. In these cases, the judge is telling the plaintiff that they're probably right, but for the wrong reasons. (take this out back and shoot it)
  • Dismissed with prejudice is the way to kill a case that can't be brought again.

    When you dismiss, it can be with or without prejudice. Without means that the case can be brought again. Usually that can be done by the plaintiff before the defendant answers. After their is an answer, it needs to be agreed to by the defendant or ordered by a judge.

    Dismissed with prejudice mean it's dead. But a new case can't be brought unless there is a new violation that is signifantly different from what occurred before filing.

    Mattel tried that trick with me. They tried to dismiss w/o prejudice in my case [sorehands.com]. This would allow them to bring it again, anywhere that Mattel had a location. Probably without anti-SLAPP statute, and maybe without free speech. Maybe they were thinking of bringing in China, where there is no free speech?

Slashdot Top Deals

"The only way for a reporter to look at a politician is down." -- H.L. Mencken

Close