Slashdot Mirror

Don't forget the Robert Novak / PetsWarehouse.com suit.

"the burden of proof is on the plaintiff in such a case"

Be that as it may, the plaintiff can certainly make life miserable for a lot of people: http://www.petsforum.com/psw/. In this case, there was a somewhat happy ending: the plaintiff eventually lost their suit, but the defendants still spent a small fortune on their defense. Really kind of a lose-lose situation.

Can't say I'm real proud of any legal system that allows crap like this to happen. It's a step up from, say, Botswana, but it ain't the shining example of perfection.

This, on its face seems to have some similarities to the Pets Warehouse case. For those that didn't settle, it seems that the plaintiff got knocked down rather badly.

No. Complaints about aquarium supplies. Why make better products when you can sue to shut the complainers up?

A Slashdot favorite, you can read about it here, here, here and a synopsis here and another one here.

Basically, suing the customers backfired horribly and Mr Novak ended up being countersued and lost. A cautionary tale!

It also is interesting to note that New York does not want to allow Mr. Novak to file bankruptcy; in particular, the court has forbidden him from paying for the bakruptcy processings in installments. See here.

My sense is that the Judges in New York are familiar with Mr. Novak's games, and are getting sick of his frivilous lawsuits.

Can't. There's a stay on the sale for 90 days, as of June 5th. The court in Alabama received word of the bankruptcy filing and therefore has delayed the sale of the domain name until after a bankruptcy court hearing in September. See Exhibit C in this document.

Better yet, donate to the fund to defend against his law suits.

What does Novak immediately do... attempt to dodge payment by declaring bankruptcy. If you look at the last page of the 7-page PDF file, there's John Benn listed amoung the creditors, and if you flip back to page 1, on the bottom the $50,001-$100,000 box is checked for the estimated debt.

Let's hope Johm persues this asshole further get gets a the court to impose a payment schedule so Novak doesn't weasle his way out of this one.

Just when you think Novak has filed just about everything he can, on June 2, 3003 he filed a bankruuptcy petition. He also has sued Tucows, Inc., an Internet Registrar as well as the Circuit Court of Colbert County, Alabama.

Wow! He lived over a thousand years to file yet another suit AND these people were able to scan through time itself to find out about it? Now THAT is the kind of service I expect to find in my news sources! :)

It's not clear to me why Mr. Novak can't just go out and buy his domain back on the open market.

Maybe because it's being sold in Alabama?

From the link:

Novak 3 involves a lawsuit against Novak as the result of a defamatory message that was posted claiming a Bar Complaint was pending on November 2001 against John Benn. A judgment has been rendered against Novak in that case.

So he's going off suing people because they are (I assume rightfully) complaining about his poor business practices in a public forum. Then he publicly defamates a LAWYER'S character and loses the whole business!!! What an ultra maroon! It's big time poetic justice that Mr. Benn will get his $50,000 settlement from the obliteration of the brand.

The story you're refering to about the fish store guy is detailed in this salon article.

There's also a more current page about the whole legal mess - note that what I'm reading as I briefly scan the page is that he's suing people in Federal court, and just filing it in the local (to him) district court. This is different from attempting to sue someone not in New York under New York state law. It still means that those who wish to defend themselves have potentially a long and expensive trip.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

It's been my experience that people who cry "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to sue you!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to come to your house and kick your ass!" or "whaaa, whaaa, I'm going to call the police and have them arrest you for being mean to me" whenever they feel personally offended on the Internet tend to be terribly immature and have serious emotional problems. People who aren't confident with themselves and feel inferior about their own abilities try to boost their own self-esteem by making empty threats of lawsuits or physical assault whenever they're on the losing end of a flamewar.

His face will turn red, he'll start to wheeze and stutter, and he will angrily type, "Yeah, well, just wait until I tell my uncle at the CIA about how rude you've been to me! He'll come and arrest you and you'll go to jail and I'll sue you for everything you have! Then I'll kick your ass, and have sex with your girlfriend!"

He will then drag his corpulent, out-of-shape, virginal body across the basement to bed and drift off to slumber thinking "Wow, I'm sure I really scared those bastards! I'm sure they'll think twice before disagreeing with ME again!" He'll feel only a slight twinge of hollow emptiness the next day when he sees his uncle, who rather than working for the CIA, is actually the assistant janitor at the local McDonald's.

A few people who seem to fit the stereotype quite well of being absolute assholes on the Internet and then threatening to sue or call the FBI, CIA, and KGB when anyone who calls them on it:

Bernard Shifman

Robert Novak

Scott Lockwood

Were these three people long-lost triplets, seperated at birth? Why do they behave in exactly the same way? Do they share a common mental disease? Or are they all actually the same person? We may never know.

Want to really make him hurt? Just point out that his store really is horrible. Service? Sucks. Price? Sucks! There are much better stores that have better stock, lower prices, and excellent customer service.

Look at Lawsuit #1 and Docket #2.

In the first lawsuit, everyone who was sued was an individual except for Actwin.com (host of the mailing list), which I think is a corporation.

In the second lawsuit, a mix of individuals, organizations, and companies are sued, including "John Doe and Mary Roe", Mr. Novak's rather flaccid attempt to sue every person who has criticized his company anonymously. According to Mr. John Benn, lawyer for the defense, who is listed as a defendant THREE times in TWO lawsuits, says that the "John Doe & Mary Roe" thing has now legal standing whatsoever and there's no court provision for seeking damages from fictional persons. He could just as well have listed "Anonymous Coward" as a defendant (and he probably WILL) for all the good it'll do him.

Look at Lawsuit #1 and Docket #2.

In the first lawsuit, everyone who was sued was an individual except for Actwin.com (host of the mailing list), which I think is a corporation.

In the second lawsuit, a mix of individuals, organizations, and companies are sued, including "John Doe and Mary Roe", Mr. Novak's rather flaccid attempt to sue every person who has criticized his company anonymously. According to Mr. John Benn, lawyer for the defense, who is listed as a defendant THREE times in TWO lawsuits, says that the "John Doe & Mary Roe" thing has now legal standing whatsoever and there's no court provision for seeking damages from fictional persons. He could just as well have listed "Anonymous Coward" as a defendant (and he probably WILL) for all the good it'll do him.

His message board. Last I checked, the board was moderated and all messages had to be pre-approved by a moderator, but it looks like one fellow has found his way around that. Congrats, Mr. Lignatron.

Don't forget to check out his message board's terms of use. Oddly enough, you're not allowed to mention the fact that the owner of the company sues his customers (and everyone else, for that matter). Any mention of the lawsuit that makes it onto his board is deleted very quickly. That doesn't mean you shouldn't try, though. Even if the message gets stuck in an approval queue and never get posted by a moderator, as seems to be the general case, one of his moderators will still have to take the time to delete it. And I get the feeling that his moderators might not even know about the lawsuit, or else they won't associate with him.

One piece of advice to those attacking his message board: if the goal is to warn his customers about what his company is up to, linking to Petsforum, TheDefenseFund, or this Slashdot story would be MUCH more effective than linking to goatse.cx. Our goal is to bring his behavior into public light, not to gross people out. That's what we have Slashdot for. I know old habits die hard, but this is a chance for us to put our trolling/crapflooding skills to good use, and work for a higher goal.

It's funny how after the lawsuit business started, Bob Novak changed the name of his message board to "The Civilized Pet Forum." Yeah, right.

Then there are the requistite requisite mailto links. What good would this post be without the requisite mailto links? Keep these requisite mailto links in mind for future use. These requisite mailto links make the world go round!

Archived mirror of PetsWarehouse page.

Archived company info.

Archived map to store

Domain registration info

GNU Wget - a website downloading tool. Useful for accessing sites that are Slashdotted, by hitting the site over, and over, and over, and over, and over...

Netcraft Info for Petswarehouse

Yes, I read it here, and I just saw standard legalese. He believes that the competing businesses are unfairly profiting by the use of his registered trademark. If he can prove in court that this is indeed the case, then he should have every right to prohibit these specific defendants from using his trademark, or popular variations of his trademark, in the future. His demands on Google are even more specific...he wants them to stop using his trademark for "Sponsored Link" advertisements placed by other companies. He claims that he already asked them to do this, but they refused. If this is indeed true, then Google (as much as I love the service) is indeed in the wrong and should be held liable.

Don't get me wrong, I think the guy is just as much a creep as all of you. My problem is that there are now over 700 comments in this discussion, and NOBODY ELSE seems to have bothered to read the complaint and find out what this is really about. Everyone is making comments based on Novaks past, assuming that they know what this is about, and ranting about how big an as*h*le he is. He is a huge as*h*le, but everyones assumptions have forced this discussion to miss the REAL issues brought up by this suit.

Main news/defense fund, full dockets

Other defense fund page

Defense Fund merchandise

Discussion forum for the lawsuit

PetsWarehouseSucks.com (Novak bought up the .net and .org versions of this domain, by the way)

Aquatic Plants digest

Google search with many relevant results

Rec.Aquaria.Freshwater.Plants

Between all those pages, you should be able to find plenty of links to archives of the messages in question, full court documents, links to news coverage of the story, etc. etc. etc. If you have any interest in aquatic plants or planted aquariums, check the link to the Aquatic Plants mailing list, where all this began. You'll find all the original posts, plus some early discussion of the lawsuit. Also, you can find plenty of stuff in the archive of rec.aquaria.freshwater.plants, including the rantings and ravings of Mr. Novak himself, as well as posts from a few people who support him and happen to have EXACTLY the same spelling and grammer that he does...

There's all kinds of fun things to discover about this case. For example, the NY Better Business Bureau gave PetsWarehouse its worst possible rating for its business practices. Mr. Novak claims that the BBB is *actually* talking about the retail store, not the website, and as a result, he's threatened to actually SUE the Better Business Bureau.

Mr. Novak is on very shaky legal ground. He's been reprimanded by judges (since he's filed three seperate lawsuits and several ammendments, there are a lot of judges involved) for not having a clue what he's doing. He told a magazine that he considers suing people to be "his hobby", and a profitable one, because he lives right down the street from the courthouse and most people can't afford to travel to his venue to fight the lawsuits. When Slashdot first covered the lawsuit in April, someone posted a comment sayign that they new Mr. Novak, and he told the poster that he has a lawyer in the family who gives him advice on filing baseless lawsuits for extra income.

Also, one of Mr. Novak's big claims in this lawsuit is "trademark infringement" (since we ALL know that saying "I don't like XYZ" is a violation of XYZ's trademark, right??), however, there's some question of whether he owns the trademark at all. He used Pets Warehouse as a "common law" trademark (IANAL, but I think that means he never actually filed the trademark, he just started using it and that entitles him to some legal protection), however, when he filed bankruptcy in the 90's, he didn't list any intellectual property that he wanted to keep on his bankruptcy application, thus it's entirely likely that he lost any trademark he might have had on the name during the bankruptcy.

He also refuses to actually serve papers against any of the defendents who live in California, because California has a strong SLAPP law that would bite him in the ass he if tried to actually bring any California residents into the lawsuit.

I'm not the only one who thinks all this is very, very crazy.

Main news/defense fund, full dockets

Other defense fund page

Defense Fund merchandise

Discussion forum for the lawsuit

Aquatic Plants digest

Rec.Aquaria.Freshwater.Plants

Between all those pages, you should be able to find plenty of links to archives of the messages in question, full court documents, links to news coverage of the story, etc. etc. etc. If you have any interest in aquatic plants or planted aquariums, check the link to the Aquatic Plants mailing list, where all this began. You'll find all the original posts, plus some early discussion of the lawsuit. Also, you can find plenty of stuff in the archive of rec.aquaria.freshwater.plants, including the rantings and ravings of Mr. Novak himself, as well as posts from a few people who support him and happen to have EXACTLY the same spelling and grammer that he does...

I have recently learned of a company with a rather similar name to yours, Petswarehouse.com.

This other company has enganged in numerous frivolous lawsuits against ordinary Internet consumers for speaking their mind. Information here.

Due to the similarity of your company's name to his, I wanted to inform you that their could be a risk of potential customers confusing your site with his. All the bad publicity his site has recieved could potentially hurt your business, as potential customers get confused, and think your company is the one performing these consumer-unfriendly, immoral acts.

You may want to bring it to the attention of your lawyers that there is a company with a confusingly similar name, that has generated a large amount of bad publicity that could potentially hurt your business. I'm sure your lawyers can advise you of an appropriate course of action.

Thank you for your time, A concerned citizen.

"11. PW is a New York based national seller of pet products and live aquaria under the trademark PETS WAREHOUSE(r). PW has spent years ... PW enjoys a strong reputation in the trade and its PETS WAREHOUSE(r) products enjoy tremendous consumer recognition and goodwill."

What a lame-ass misrepresentation. The company itself apparently hasn't garnered as much positive consumer recognition and goodwill. After re-reading this, I saw the catch: "... products enjoy ...".

The products, which as I understand are not manufactured by PW, but rather are sold/distributed by PW, are the objects enjoying this regognition.

What's at least somewhat comforting about this whole thing is that on his deathbed, you just know that Robert Novak isn't going to be thinking, "ahh, I got some money from some frivolous lawsuits."

Rest in peace...

might Petswarehouse be a good target for googlebombing? I think that it'd be an appropriate response to the bullying tactics employed by Petswarehouse.

Click here here and here
:)

Click here here and here
:)

Click here here and here
:)

Check out This Link apparently their lawyer did bring up Rule 11.

I can't imagine this case will go anywhere, its amazing that the defendants are settling instead of representing themselves at the very least.

BTW, PetsWarehouse is NOT a registered trademark.

They have applied for trademark status, but it will likely be rejected because it is too generic. This is only a small part of why this lawsuit is insane! Check out the Defense Fund website for more info.

you read the article right?

Actually, yes I did and more!

i don't believe it has gone before a judge yet.

Well, the record disagrees with your belief:

I read Pets Forum Docket, after following links from the article, to find this:

Not yet docketed: Stipulation of Settlement and Dismissal with Prejudice.

03-01-02 (31) STIPULATION and ORDER denying [8-1] motion to dismiss the claims pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) and 56. The foregoing stipulation is so ordered; and whereas the foregoing stipulation, inter alia, releases plaintiff's claims against deft. Resler, the Motion to dismiss is denied as moot (signed/unsigned by Judge Denis Hurley, on 3-1-02) (lm) [Entry date 03-06-02]

Looks like the judge had at least one opportunity to get rid of this nonsense, but chose to make his court look busy instead. NOT by accepting the stipulation and settlement, but by seeing that the case is nonsense and throwing it out. Have seen this happen in domestic court numerous times (motion brought, some agreement between parties, whatever, judge hears it, throws it out and scolds the lawyers for trying to pull a fast one). Fed judges have an even wider path than TN Circuit Court judges in matters like this.

you read the article right?

Actually, yes I did and more!

i don't believe it has gone before a judge yet.

Well, the record disagrees with your belief:

I read Pets Forum Docket, after following links from the article, to find this:

Not yet docketed: Stipulation of Settlement and Dismissal with Prejudice.

03-01-02 (31) STIPULATION and ORDER denying [8-1] motion to dismiss the claims pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) and 56. The foregoing stipulation is so ordered; and whereas the foregoing stipulation, inter alia, releases plaintiff's claims against deft. Resler, the Motion to dismiss is denied as moot (signed/unsigned by Judge Denis Hurley, on 3-1-02) (lm) [Entry date 03-06-02]

Looks like the judge had at least one opportunity to get rid of this nonsense, but chose to make his court look busy instead. NOT by accepting the stipulation and settlement, but by seeing that the case is nonsense and throwing it out. Have seen this happen in domestic court numerous times (motion brought, some agreement between parties, whatever, judge hears it, throws it out and scolds the lawyers for trying to pull a fast one). Fed judges have an even wider path than TN Circuit Court judges in matters like this.

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 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) Forum hosted by the plaintiff (he has a habit of deleting messages, and blocking posters, as is his right, but be aware it will only have ONE side) The defense fund's web site A collection of court documents hosted by the lawyer in charge of the fund And, finally, to archives of the original messages, so you can read it yourself, and see what REALLY happened