1  |   Order by index

Apr 5, 2002, 2:39pm

http://msnbc.com/news/734035.asp

April 4 - Fish hobbyists on the Internet have been gurgling about something other than their
tanks lately. It has to do with freedom of speech, and it impacts all of us who log on.

WHEN DAN RESLER complained last May on the Aquatic Plant Digest about a bad experience he had
with PetsWarehouse.com, he didn't know it would cost him $4,150. Nor did he know he'd become a
symbol of the right to speak one's mind on the Internet.
Now Resler, as well as the others named in a lawsuit filed by the PetsWarehouse.com
owner, is just that - living, breathing proof that what you say online can come back to haunt
you.
"Avoid Pet Warehouse plants," Resler wrote on May 15, 2001, in a message to other APD
members that detailed how an order he placed arrived later than he'd expected, and with higher
shipping charges than he'd been told at the time of sale.
Another list member, Jared Weinberger, who maintains his own Web site about planted
tanks, told the list in his post that he was going to put a warning about PetsWarehouse.com in
his site's links section.
Still others weighed in with similar bad experiences with the company, and even pointed
to the company's poor Better Business Bureau rating - not unlike a group of friends sharing
stories about the bad service at the local restaurant.

Except that these complaints, since they were posted on the Internet, were read by the store's
proprietor.
Online, one man's freedom to grouse became another man's claim of defamation.
Two weeks after the online discussion, Robert Novak of PetsWarehouse.com, based in
Copaigue, N.Y., sued Resler, Weinberger and several other members of the Aquatic Plant Digest
list. He also sued the service that hosts the list, and the woman who maintains it as a
volunteer.
The initial papers, filed in federal court, asked for $15 million in compensatory and
punitive damages.
Novak claimed humiliation, emotional distress, libelous statements and the dilution of
his trademark as a result of the APD posts, which have led, he said in court papers, to
"headaches, nausea, nervousness, anxiety, embarrassment, humiliation, and mental distress."

continued...................
----------------------------------------------------------

Apr 5, 2002, 2:48pm

LOL!!!! today people will sue over absoultly anything!
[View Quote]

Apr 5, 2002, 6:08pm

That's one downside to the US. We definately need a new system of
government and laws. Rework the Amendments to disallow any outside money to
gov't officials.

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Apr 5, 2002, 7:01pm

What kind of liberationist weed have you been smoking? If it ain't broke,
don't fix it. Most frivilous lawsuits are thrown out by the judge. You
shouldn't limit someone's freedom to bring a lawsuit to court. If it's
truly frivolous, most likely it'll get thrown out.

IMO, this is why the US is the most popular country in the world. People
can do almost anything they darn well please. Downside or not, the system
works and works well. Name me 10 countries in the world who haven't drafted
an entirely new constitution in the last 200 years. >:)

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Apr 5, 2002, 7:09pm

It doesn't matter who hasn't done it. Most of our gov't officials are
corrupt because they get big business money. 90% of lawsuits aren't thrown
out. Ever hear of the one where a robber was robbing a house and fell on a
knife? He sued the people he robbed, and won the lawsuit. Now tell me
that's not frivilious.

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Apr 5, 2002, 7:30pm

That was on the movie Liar Liar, with Jim Carey. I am not quite sure I
would believe that its true. Find me the news story and maybe I'll believe
it.

[View Quote]

Apr 5, 2002, 7:35pm

I don't remember that, it was a long time ago. We talked about it in my
Government Mechanics class :P. I wish I still had the article on it..

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Apr 8, 2002, 2:08am

never said 90 percent of lawsuits are thrown out.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Apr 8, 2002, 2:09am

Hey guys.. never said that all lawsuits that are thrown out are frivolous,
just that most frivolous lawsuits are thrown out. :)

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Apr 8, 2002, 2:20am

It's a pretty damn "frivilious" one. It's more so then anything I've ever
seen.

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Apr 8, 2002, 9:35pm

Yes I remember that. That's why I said most of them, not all, are thrown
out.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Apr 9, 2002, 1:24am

You never said most.. you just said if it was truely frivilious.. and it
is/was.

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Apr 9, 2002, 8:07pm

My bad. =P

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Apr 9, 2002, 8:08pm

Some judges are really not fit to be judges...

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Apr 9, 2002, 8:31pm

Very true.. it's all about the money ;). Power corrupts, and absolute power
corrupst absolutely... that's my favorite quote of all time.

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Apr 11, 2002, 2:04am

Hi everyone:

[View Quote] The RIAA come to mind here.....

90% of lawsuits aren't thrown
> out.

That's why people dread the idea of going to JURY DUTY...

Ever hear of the one where a robber was robbing a house and fell on a
> knife? He sued the people he robbed, and won the lawsuit. Now tell me
> that's not frivilious.

Well now gee Bowen....Falling on that knife serves him right, dontcha
think?? I measn think about it. Had he not broken into that woman's home,
he wouldn't have landed on that knife and he most certainly wouldn't have
been wounded by it either. If *I* was on that jury, I would've taken the
"serves him right" approach and voted NOT GUILTY.

Same goes for the plant guy. If he had delivered what he had promised WHEN
he promised, his name or company wouldn't have been plastered all over the
Internet like it was. Again, it serves him right.

However since he was the PLAINTIFF and not the defendant, I hope he learned
something from his experience.

Just my $.02 worth....Cheers :-)

Patrick

Apr 11, 2002, 2:46am

>
> The RIAA come to mind here.....
>
> 90% of lawsuits aren't thrown
>
> That's why people dread the idea of going to JURY DUTY...

And why people "mysteriously" lose them in the mail. I don't understand
jury duty.. if it's my right to server on the jury.. it should be my right
not to and not be the judge of someone's crime. Maybe I don't want to
decided someone's guilty? :P

> Well now gee Bowen....Falling on that knife serves him right, dontcha
> think?? I measn think about it. Had he not broken into that woman's
home,
> he wouldn't have landed on that knife and he most certainly wouldn't have
> been wounded by it either. If *I* was on that jury, I would've taken the
> "serves him right" approach and voted NOT GUILTY.
>

Some people don't have a lot of common sense though.. Hence why most of
these lawsuits come to be. Oh you peed in my toilet without my permission
while looking in the mirror, time to sue you!

> Same goes for the plant guy. If he had delivered what he had promised
WHEN
> he promised, his name or company wouldn't have been plastered all over the
> Internet like it was. Again, it serves him right.

People are way to jumpy with the deformation of character and slander.
Slander is saying.. well you screwed me over, so I'm going to take your
picture and put it around town saying what you did. Not just saying... "god
you're so stupid.. I should warn my friends about you."

Nothing really big, we just really need to change our laws to protect the
innocent bystandards more. Such as from fraud, and the likes. The gov't is
made for the citizens and by the citizens, that's the principle of
democracy, but for some reason it's being run by a totalitarian republic.
Basically we select people we want to represent us, but they're being payed
off and people they didn't originaly want get put into power. The biggest
representation of this is the recent elections in the US. Bush was not
elected by the people, but since his brother is the governor of Florida,
there was a "glitch" and he just happened to get the electoral college
votes, thus guarenteeing his win.

I hope people don't think I'm anti-patriotic. LoL that's really not my
point. I just don't like the way the gov't of my country acts and carries
out it's duty. Power should be taken away from the house and put into our
hands, more of a citizen representation there.. maybe make a "representation
body" so they can do the houses work with retrospect to what the citizens
want? Hope I didn't bore you guys with politics.. it's just a fun issue to
discuss.. to me anyways.

--Bowen--

Apr 11, 2002, 5:10am

You know, Bill O'Reilly was talking about this in his books. I agree with
you that politicians should be held accountable to the people. That is what
reelections are for. You should read em. :) The Hillary interview is um...
well... very funny.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Apr 11, 2002, 10:42am

I've been thinking about getting some books like that.. be glad to finally
find something to read that won't put me to sleep in 10 minutes ;)..

Hillary is one of the better politicians though?

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index