Be careful of what you say, first amendment don't apply.
#1
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by DaveZ
Perhaps this would be better suited for Off Topic?
Perhaps this would be better suited for Off Topic?
A frivolous lawsuit IMNSHO, but who knows...
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Glendale/Burbank/LA
Posts: 6,455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geeze... let it be known that if anyone here gets sued for expressing an bad experience as a consumer, I will be the first to hold up my long, bony, middle finger to the company that is suing.
#6
Registered User
Freedom of speech is one thing, but hacking in is another. Security hole or not what he did was wrong. If you were walking down the street and saw someone's door open would you go in uninvited? I don't agree with the decision for the other people - that's just nuts. But if this guy had problems with shipping charges why not have the credit card company dispute the charges instead of infiltrating the vendor's computer systems?
#7
Registered User
The hacking issue is completely beside the point - the issue is the guy suing handfulls of people for expressing their dissatisfaction with his business. Remember the VW guy who was sued by a dealership because he posted his bad service experience? Same thing. He's even claimed he does lawsuits as a hobby. Personally, I find this sort of behavior entirely criminal, reprehensible, cruel and evil.
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/04/...ants/index.html
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/04/0...=thread&tid=153
From Slashdot conversations:
[QUOTE]by cameroncase on Thursday April 04, @12:29PM (#3285126)
Actually, that isn't exactly what happened. On that list there is a long time trend of getting advice on where to shop (think about it, there aren't that many places to buy aquatic plants...tiny hobbie). One guy offered his opinion. Dozens more chimed in with similar stories (not just "me too"). One guy's complaint was overcharged shipping, but there were many others (including delayed shipping running into the multiple weeks, dead plants upon arrival, etc). There are just too many people that agreed for me to think he made it up. Plus, check the history of the case. The plaintiff continuously adds people each time someone says something negative about this their experiences, or even about the suit. My favorite part? Two of the defendants are John Doe and Mary Roe (in essence anyone else from the APD that he decides to add). More confusion is that he has claimed, in another article [libn.com] that filing suits is his "hobby." He also admits that the court is five miles from him, so it is a short drive, while each defendant has to pay for a plane ticket and motel to appear in court. The guy enjoys this. Read some of the amended complaints he has written, some are funny, most are sad, and generally all are poorly written. Why? Oh, he's representing himself. Wait, you say, how can a non-lawyer represent a corporation (Pets Warehouse Inc.)? Well, it can't, but he is doing it anyway. As soon as they sort out whether or not his company is incorporated or a sole-proprietorship maybe this will go away (if is is INC as he says, he can't represent it). For more information (and trust me, this is more about free speech and the internet than it is about plants or aquariums) here are some sites: Forum for the suits discussion (generally pro defendants) [compuserve.com]
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/04/...ants/index.html
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/04/0...=thread&tid=153
From Slashdot conversations:
[QUOTE]by cameroncase on Thursday April 04, @12:29PM (#3285126)
Actually, that isn't exactly what happened. On that list there is a long time trend of getting advice on where to shop (think about it, there aren't that many places to buy aquatic plants...tiny hobbie). One guy offered his opinion. Dozens more chimed in with similar stories (not just "me too"). One guy's complaint was overcharged shipping, but there were many others (including delayed shipping running into the multiple weeks, dead plants upon arrival, etc). There are just too many people that agreed for me to think he made it up. Plus, check the history of the case. The plaintiff continuously adds people each time someone says something negative about this their experiences, or even about the suit. My favorite part? Two of the defendants are John Doe and Mary Roe (in essence anyone else from the APD that he decides to add). More confusion is that he has claimed, in another article [libn.com] that filing suits is his "hobby." He also admits that the court is five miles from him, so it is a short drive, while each defendant has to pay for a plane ticket and motel to appear in court. The guy enjoys this. Read some of the amended complaints he has written, some are funny, most are sad, and generally all are poorly written. Why? Oh, he's representing himself. Wait, you say, how can a non-lawyer represent a corporation (Pets Warehouse Inc.)? Well, it can't, but he is doing it anyway. As soon as they sort out whether or not his company is incorporated or a sole-proprietorship maybe this will go away (if is is INC as he says, he can't represent it). For more information (and trust me, this is more about free speech and the internet than it is about plants or aquariums) here are some sites: Forum for the suits discussion (generally pro defendants) [compuserve.com]
Trending Topics
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Torrance
Posts: 8,332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's messed up. If I were going to buy a fishtank, I doubt I'd buy it from these guys. Customer service is important to most of us, and these fish tank guys just don't get it.