A Cold Call, a Blog, and a $20 Million Lawsuit

[Erlene]

http://smallbusiness.aol.com/articl...09990001?icid=200100125x1215497859x1201014983

 

[Connie]

That's a bit scary and enlightening.

 

[bloomz]

Very enlightening.

And another reason to keep blogs strictly positive.

Proflowers already invoked the legal hammer - more will be forthcoming.

 

[Queen of Weddings]

Yes it is so sad, but when you look at from a business level, so then why can someone just trash you all over the place and get away with it, facts or no facts but can,,,So will you do this to the person doing this to you that has cost you business ??From a law aspect, it is getting really rich, for instance the man who posted a rant about his x on a site, and x is sueing him, or thebook company who had several folks who didn't like it, one was a competiro, and now he is sueing them, Would y ou do this???

 

[aileen_c]

I believe she had a right to post about the company...but I do believe she could have worded it in a way that wasn't harmful to her. She could have stated that she was approached, asked to pay this amount and if anyone else has had that happen to them. Instead of writing how it's a scam, etc I believe that's where it got her into trouble...no real proof.
Blogging is a very sketchy thing...it's the written word and lots of legalities come with that!

 

[bloomz]

Frivilous lawsuits cost a bundle, right or wrong.

More will be revealed I'm sure...this is probably just the beginning of reputation management with hammers.

 

[duanermb]

This reminds me of the "rank first in Google for keyword 'Winnipeg Florist', only $99 per month" calls I got a few weeks back. "We have other customers waiting to take on this great opportunity".

Someone in the business I know almost went for it because their pitch was so good to anyone who doesn't know about paid Google and organic Google. This type of "duping" is rampant and malicious IMO, and should be discussed, carefully. I blogged about it without using names.

I think there is still good reason to get the "truth" out there online.

This is a very popular site that lists many of our "friends" in the business and has a very high pagerank in Google. They seem to get away with it.

http://www.ripoffreport.com/

 

[bloomz]

If you haven't read that whole post about that lawsuit - I think it to be highly recommended. You're even responsible for comments by others on what you posted? Yow.

I've seen several posters here who routinely post negative things about a certain set of 1600 pound gorillas.

be careful.....

 

[CHR]

There's a well known case in the SEO/SEM world where a less-than-honest firm called Traffic Power filed a defamation lawsuit against respected blogger Aaron Wall of SEOBook.com and a site called TrafficPowerSucks.com.

"Plaintiffs think they can bully Web sites and blogs into doing what they want," commented Eric Goldman, an attorney, and a faculty member at the Marquette University School of Law, located in Milwaukee, Wis.

The SEO/SEM community was well aware of the misleading and deceptive practices of Traffic Power and offered Wall assistance.

From SEO Roundtable

The Aaron Wall vs. Traffic Power lawsuit was actually a beautiful thing. The SEO/SEM community go together and backed Aaron with their support including money, links, advice and guidance. Even more, Matt Cutts of Google went above and beyond and helped Aaron Wall by officially confirming Traffic Power was banned by Google, something Google never did until that date. So the whole process, although very problematic for Aaron, helped the SEO industry grow tremendously. Finally in April 2006, the Traffic Power vs. Aaron Wall case was dismissed.

A suit like this was created to intimidate and silence critics. Now, if the critics make false allegations, they put themselves directly in the cross-hairs. But a suit can also expose the suing company to even more scrutiny - and make them open their books & business practices to the world - which could cost them a whole lot more.

Remember that Rich and Kathy's cease and desist letter from ProFlowers was not about the truthfulness of their video, but about the use of the trademarked name by a 'competing business.'

 

[Eric S]

In January, Leslie Richard got a call from a man from Vision Media Television. The Boca Raton, Florida, TV production company wanted to know if Richard would agree to be interviewed for a documentary on eco-fashion. According to Richard, the caller implied that the film might air on PBS or possibly on CNN.

Okay so today I get a call from a company that says they are doing something simular to this. WTF? This from a show thats on KCAL9.

Its weird that I see this post today but even weirder that someone called to do an interview. Yea the only thing is they want $2500.00

Whatever. They can pay me damit!!!

 

[CHR]

First the ego, then the wallet. Isn't that the way about 49% of salesmen approach us?

Another 49% use FUD.

Then there's the 2% who actually pitch their product honestly.

The hard party is separating the ego merchants from the FUDs to find that genuine 2%.

Sounds a lot like the online flower world. :>

 

[RJD]

Remember that Rich and Kathy's cease and desist letter from ProFlowers was not about the truthfulness of their video, but about the use of the trademarked name by a 'competing business.'

And not necessarily by us, but in the comments of the video, too! I can't remember the other recent case where a blogger was sued for a comment left on the blog. It was thrown out, but not without nearly breaking the blogger.

 

[goldfish]

I've seen several posters here who routinely post negative things about a certain set of 1600 pound gorillas.

be careful.....

Statements of opinion are not actionable. Only the statements made as "facts" can be actionable libel.

"Statements made as facts" are the statements that can be proven true or false. Opinions are not.

For example, let's say someone said Teleflora (FTD or 1800flowers or whatever) sucks. This statement is an opinion. No sane lawyer will sue you. Words such as "stupid" "despicable" etc are opinions in nature.

OTOH, if someone stated a WS company xyz is selling a poisonous product, that's actionable libel if proven false. I've seen many posts in FC that are potentially dangerous, such as accusing a competitor of doing something illegal.

If you are not 100% certain of the fact you are reporting as a semi-journalist, I think it's better not to say it in a public forum or your blog.

 

[bloomz]

We all know the 3 biggest lies, right? (the check is in the mail etc...)

Well for quite some time there's been a 4th one. I've heard it many times and it goes like this:

"They can't do that".