Slashdot Mirror

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. 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?

Who determines if something contains serious value?

According to censorware.org, CyberPatrol filters the rsi newsgroups. Is it a coincidence that they are litigating with an RSI injured geek and trying to get him to be silent about the lawsuit?

Some people are trying to deny the existence of the holocaust, maybe they can just filter it. Why not filter slavery and anything else embarasing?

When I talk about Mattel trying to silence me and my website, people refer to me as a crackpot and tell me to get a life.

These people don't realize that they can be next.

One must be protect their rights, or they will lose them!

Since the lawyers can charge $400/hour for this, chasing after stupid claims can really help lose money at record rates.

Mattel must be spending a fortune in lawyers for going after me and Barbie Benson's Sin Circus and going after a college kid for posting a Barbie Joke

I have read the censorship pages. I agree there should be a way to keep the kids off the "bad sites", but there should be some form of oversight. According to the censorware page, they block the misc.health.injuries.rsi.moderated newsgroup saying that it has SexActs Violence/Profanity. The non-mdoerated group had sex related spam, but the moderated group?? It also happens that they were sued (and paid over $140k) for violating the rights of an RSI injured worker. Coincidence??

I'd be really suspicious if they had blocked my site which details the lawsuit.

Both Mass. and California have some form of anti slap statute.

In my case with Mattel, I am arguing that their countersuit violates the anti-retsliation provisions of the FMLA, ADA, etc. This opens them up for unlimited puntive damages.

.

If you embarass Mattel on the web, they will try to sue you into oblivion.

For those who don't know, I posted the information about my lawsuit against them. They filed a countersuit for libel, saying the information on the site is not true. They still continue with this countersuit after they paid over $140k to me in a judgment. If the information on the site was not true, why would they pay so much money for a lawsuit which is detailed on the site?

Mattel Threatened one kid who put some Barbie jokes up at school. I was informed that Mattel also is going after Barbie Benson and her site Barbie's Sin Circus for using the name Barbie. It has nothing to do with the doll (except, when you see her pic, you'll see she's a doll ;).

No wonder why I get so much work done when I don't sleep for a week.

Who says I drink too much coffee?

In a public figure libel, you must prove that:

• The statements are false.
• That the false statements were published recklessly or with Malice

A company may not automatically be not a public figure. But a non-public figure may be a limited public figure if they are in a controversy of public interest. Employment issues, discrimination, etc. are issues of public interest. Especially since government agencies were created to deal with them.

I have also read some cases where labor dispute issues are protected from being considered causes for a defamation action.

There is more information on my website and and the summary judgment motion goes into great detail on libel.

I read the censorware site and found it interesting that it listed CyberPatrol as blocking both misc.health.injuries.rsi.misc and misc.health.injuries.rsi.moderated. For those who have not read my website about Mattel would know that they have paid over $140k in a RSI related lawsuit.

Yes, I have posted some of the informatinon on the lawsuit to the RSI newsgroups.

I read the censorware site and found it interesting that it listed CyberPatrol as blocking both misc.health.injuries.rsi.misc and misc.health.injuries.rsi.moderated. For those who have not read my website about Mattel would know that they have paid over $140k in a RSI related lawsuit.

Yes, I have posted some of the informatinon on the lawsuit to the RSI newsgroups.

It's not just the cost of having a lawyer (or barister). There are costs in preparing papers, filing fees, copying documents, tracking down witnesses.

Now, the other side (or at least in my case) demand documents, some of which they have no right too, going back years and years. Forcing you to travel to depositions, digging through your entire life, making totally false acusations as a defense.

Court cases can be quite stressful. There had been many nights, due to Mattel's ridiculous countersuit, that I had problems sleeping. In preparing for the summary judgment motion, I and my lawyer pulled some all nighters. Prior to flying up for hearings and/or depositions, I would have to forgo sleep in preparation for the trip.

In my case with Mattel their filing a countersuit for libel backfired. It not only opened them up for new complaints of retailation (prohibited by the acts the first suit was filed under) which includes the potential for large punitive damages. Mattel's countersuit brought more publicity to the case then the original lawsuit. Mattel is using the countersuit to try to silence me, but the countersuit actually generated more media coverage.

A countersuit, can also force the original plantiff to stay with their position and not settle. As in MP3/RIAA case by MP3 showing that their product is not for stealing music, it goes a long way into proving their countersuit. If RIAA wins their suit against MP3 it also defeats the counterclaim since truth is a defense to libel.

In the UK, trials are done under a gag order, in the United States lawsuits and trials are done in the public eye.

Any suit can be filed. This is proved by Mattel's countersuit of me.

This one does seem somewhat reasonable. At least it's not a huge company trying to litigating a smaller one into poverty.

Free speech is at stake. Software interoperability id st stake. Microsoft is kicking themselves for not thinking of doing this first.

People who told me that I should not bitch about my case. That I should just shut up and keep quiet. But my point is that a large company should not be allowed to shut up individuals for saying what they don't like.

If things continue like this, M$ will prevent other companies from working with Word and Excel file formats.

I guess everyone who is passionate about a cause is a crackpot. So am I about my battel with Mattel. So were the Wright Brothers. Two Steves were called crazy for starting a computer company out their garage.

There are many people who consider anyone who fights the system to by crackpots.

With the DeCSS and the Mattel case it is true. With he Mattel case, there was only one article that went into detail on this case or the website. Mattel's ridiculous countersuit has generated 2 online articles, another newspaper article, and a TV news story.

In China though, the government can censor. When I was in China, TV broadcasts from Hong Kong (before the handover) were censored, and some reports were blocked. The University internet went though a filter in Bejing.

Censorship does not work in a "free" country. Some companies in the USA want to forget that.

The courts can only: award money, property, or injunctions.

Usually courts must award money, unless potential for great harm is shown. In a corporate injury case, even the McDonalds coffee case (if you think the case is frivilous, look at the facts), the judge can't burn the McDonald's CEO crotch. By with a $3 million dollar verdict, they now warn people and don't keep the coffee at scalding temperatures. Most other companies do the same.

In China, to insure Y2K compliance of airlines, the CEOs in China had to be flying for the changeover. Here, in the USA, the threat of large a judgment make some companies "do the right thing."

This is not to say that all lawsuits are valid. Companies, such as Mattel use lawsuits to beat down the little guy. People also file friviolous lawsuits.

Is their a lawyer who will sue the Girl Scouts for me? I ate three boxes of their Thin Mints and did't lose a pound. :)

How much of a difference is it if the goverment censors a person or if a large company censors you?

The effect is the same, the enforcement is not. A large company like Mattel will try to sue you into oblivion is you don't shut up. Maybe they will get the government to kick your door down and throw you in jail. A government will just throw you into jail, cutting out the first step of suing you into oblivion.

We can stil bash on the DeCSS. We can bash on Mattel for their suit.

We can always go to the backup bashee - Microsoft

Or we can bash the company that when you call them, and you get put into a queue that tells you, "Your call is very important to us, please hold on."

So, are you saying we should censor their legitimate activity?

It's a dangerous road to travel, where we claim to fight for freedom, but we become censors.

Who determines who the bullies are? I agree that MPAA should be slapped around for their actions. But then the other side will say,

"Where did these hackers get the right to invade someone else's intellectual property in the name of open source?"

Or in my case with Mattel people have said,

" Grow up! It's time for you to move on with your life!
They may have been irrosponsible, but frankly you started it.

We have to educate some of these people and companies that they can't do the this to people. We can't lower ourselfs to these levels.

What we have to do to the companies that use these tactics:

• Educate them
• Tell them out opinions
• Tell others, not just geeks, about this. Darkness can't exist in the light of truth.
• Educate them to the fact that we won't stand for this
• Fight this legally. When a company abuses process like this, turn around and file suit for this abuse. A few large award against companies like this, will discourage others bullies.

If we don't fight this now, what about the next person!

That is part of why I am fighting my battle with Mattel!

Though it is can be hard to fight, it will be harder to fight later if people keep giving in! My battle with Mattel wears on me at time, but then I remember what I am fighting for and then come back fighting harder!

If the media mis-characterizes this, then you must correct them. I did this with a Boston Globe reporter and I will inform him of this in a few minutes.

The law there is different from the US, but there be some similar things.

In California and Mass. there is an ANTI-SLAPP provision. This looks like more abusive process. But what this looks like is that they may be using criminal prosecution to silence disent. Since it was on a website, no need to preserve evidence of publication, just print it!

I was suprised that a judge issued an injunction when it was already denied.

This is another example of a big company trying to shut up things that they don't like.

Mattel is doing the same to me. The people who thinks that my site is just bitching, do not realize the implications of Mattel's actions. Mattel (then MSI) was asked what is libelous, and they still have not given a full answer. Last Tuesday at the summary judgment motion hearing (which the judge probably would whack them hard after hearing all the facts) when the judge asked Mattel what was libelous, they said two things then moved to dismiss the case. Mattel filed a motion to dismiss w/o prejudice so that they can file again anywhere! Not to dismiss with prejudice that we agreed to.

In 1996, I asked them what was factually incorrect about the site, the never answered. They still have not fully answered the question of what is factually incorrect.

Opinion is not libel. Mattel does not like my opinion and the fact that I backed up the opinion!

Microsoft probably does not like the opinions about them or Windows on this site. What if Microsoft starting suing over this site, just because they didn't like what was being said? And demand the information on everyone who said anything on this site about them or Windows?

Double jeopardy applies to criminal trials.

The doctorines of resajudicata and collateral estoppel apply in civil cases. These are to prevent a company or person from relitigating the same issue after it has been decided.

RSI injured worker wins against Mattel, Mattel still tries to sue him into silence!

If you say publically what a company (or someone with deep pockets) does not like, they may try to sue you into silence.

Mattel paid a judgment (under CRP 11) in the case which the website detailed. Why would Mattel pay a six figure six figure judgment if there was no wrongdoing. Though $140k is not much money to Mattel, it is much more than a nuisance amount. If I was just looking to make some quick money, I could have taken a settlment that would have required me to shut up!

My site has helped people. An email received from a reader of the site today said,

"Your web site, Boston Globe coverage and TV appearances gave me the hope and strength to file a complaint with the MCAD. My company also fired me for similar reasons."

Another reader said,

Very interesting and informative web site. Good luck with the case. I'm going to go back to work (at a small college) and make sure I do everything to accommodate a lady who is having RSI."

RSI injured worker wins against Mattel, Mattel still tries to shut him up!

You forgot about the lawsuit at http://www.sorehands.com/mattel! Mattel paid over $140k in a rule 68 judgment, but still continued with the countersuit.

At the summary judgment motion hearing on 1/18/00, when the judge asked Mattel's attorney (Rosen) what statements were libelous, after stating a couple of things, Rosen said that he could shorten the hearing and moved to dismiss their counterclaim. We agreed to a dismissal with prejudice. Today, via fax, I received their motion to dismiss w/o prejudice. To me it seems like Mattel wants to be able to practice brinkmanship. What I mean by brinkmanship, is Mattel will file suit, run through all the motions until a judge will see the facts (and of course slap Mattel hard), and them Mattel will dismiss the case.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, but Mattel still tries to shut him up!

You forgot about the lawsuit at http://www.sorehands.com/mattel! Mattel paid over $140k in a rule 68 judgment, but still continued with the countersuit.

At the summary judgment motion hearing on 1/18/00, when the judge asked Mattel's attorney (Rosen) what statements were libelous, after stating a couple of things, Rosen said that he could shorten the hearing and moved to dismiss their counterclaim. We agreed to a dismissal with prejudice. Today, via fax, I received their motion to dismiss w/o prejudice. To me it seems like Mattel wants to be able to practice brinkmanship. What I mean by brinkmanship, is Mattel will file suit, run through all the motions until a judge will see the facts (and of course slap Mattel hard), and them Mattel will dismiss the case.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, but Mattel still tries to shut him up!

When sued by Mattel, I refused to bring down my website. When Mattel was faced with a judge ruling on my summary judgment motion, Mattel folded. When the judge asked Mattel's lawyer, what they are claiming was defamatory, they moved to dismiss their counterclaim.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, again!

When sued by Mattel, I refused to bring down my website. When Mattel was faced with a judge ruling on my summary judgment motion, Mattel folded. When the judge asked Mattel's lawyer, what they are claiming was defamatory, they moved to dismiss their counterclaim.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, again!

When Mattel (then TLC/MSI) brought their ridiculous countersuit against me, they were trying to silence me. It had brought more press coverage. There was only one newspaper article about my lawsuit. There has been another newspaper article, two online articles, and a TV piece about the countersuit.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, again!

When Mattel (then TLC/MSI) brought their ridiculous countersuit against me, they were trying to silence me. It had brought more press coverage. There was only one newspaper article about my lawsuit. There has been another newspaper article, two online articles, and a TV piece about the countersuit.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, again!

The term you are looking for is abuse of process.

Mattel has been doing this with me! Mattel entered a countersuit because I posted the information about my lawsuit against them (mostly against companies they bought) on my website http://www.sorehands.com/mattel. Mattel entered a countersuit on libel, but when challenged, they dropped it. At the motion for summary judgment on Tuesday (1/18/00), Mattel moved to dismiss their coutnersuit. They claimed it was to let "the people involved to get on with their lives. I think they didn't want the judge to evaluate the facts and whack them. If they really wanted to drop it, they could have long before that.

Lawyers and companies always write "obey or die" letters. If it is a lawyer giving what can be construed as advice, they lawyer could be sanctioned.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, again!

The term you are looking for is abuse of process.

Mattel has been doing this with me! Mattel entered a countersuit because I posted the information about my lawsuit against them (mostly against companies they bought) on my website http://www.sorehands.com/mattel. Mattel entered a countersuit on libel, but when challenged, they dropped it. At the motion for summary judgment on Tuesday (1/18/00), Mattel moved to dismiss their coutnersuit. They claimed it was to let "the people involved to get on with their lives. I think they didn't want the judge to evaluate the facts and whack them. If they really wanted to drop it, they could have long before that.

Lawyers and companies always write "obey or die" letters. If it is a lawyer giving what can be construed as advice, they lawyer could be sanctioned.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, again!

The term you are looking for is abuse of process.

Mattel has been doing this with me! Mattel entered a countersuit because I posted the information about my lawsuit against them (mostly against companies they bought) on my website http://www.sorehands.com/mattel. Mattel entered a countersuit on libel, but when challenged, they dropped it. At the motion for summary judgment on Tuesday (1/18/00), Mattel moved to dismiss their coutnersuit. They claimed it was to let "the people involved to get on with their lives. I think they didn't want the judge to evaluate the facts and whack them. If they really wanted to drop it, they could have long before that.

Lawyers and companies always write "obey or die" letters. If it is a lawyer giving what can be construed as advice, they lawyer could be sanctioned.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, again!

One tactic of big companies, sue the people into poverty, scare them from speaking out, and blur the facts.

This is not a new tactic. If people speaking out, or doing something that a large company does not like, scare them with hordes of lawyers.

Mattel is trying to do the same thing to me. They don't like what I am saying, so they sue me. Mattel also threatened to sue a college student for posting Barbi jokes

With the web, it makes it possible for people to publish and/or collaborate without being part of a big corporation. This changes the landscape and is forcing the corporation to use litigation to fight people speaking out or working at something they don't like.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

One tactic of big companies, sue the people into poverty, scare them from speaking out, and blur the facts.

This is not a new tactic. If people speaking out, or doing something that a large company does not like, scare them with hordes of lawyers.

Mattel is trying to do the same thing to me. They don't like what I am saying, so they sue me. Mattel also threatened to sue a college student for posting Barbi jokes

With the web, it makes it possible for people to publish and/or collaborate without being part of a big corporation. This changes the landscape and is forcing the corporation to use litigation to fight people speaking out or working at something they don't like.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

One tactic of big companies, sue the people into poverty, scare them from speaking out, and blur the facts.

This is not a new tactic. If people speaking out, or doing something that a large company does not like, scare them with hordes of lawyers.

Mattel is trying to do the same thing to me. They don't like what I am saying, so they sue me. Mattel also threatened to sue a college student for posting Barbi jokes

With the web, it makes it possible for people to publish and/or collaborate without being part of a big corporation. This changes the landscape and is forcing the corporation to use litigation to fight people speaking out or working at something they don't like.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

When I was in school, I had to wait in a line for a terminal. That terminal was hooked to a Vax 11/780 with 75 to 100 users.

I later got a 300 baud modem.

Once I even had to use punch cards!

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

I have trademarked: trademark and trademarked. Anyone who uses those terms, please send your $.02 worth to.....

The use of my trademarks terms may be used in slashdot stories and comments for $25 per use.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

Do you think that you should get rid of the sexual harassment laws? They cost companies money!

There should be some protection for employees. I'm not saying that they should rebuild the house. But they should maybe send out someone to check the ergonomics (maybe the same person who checks it in the office?).

RSIs also cost companies money. Lost time from work, surgery, medical treatment, etc. An RSI is cheaper to prevent than to treat.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

Though law is supposed to be logical (which we all are :) it is not always.

There are judges that make bad decisions, but justify it by (mis)applying case law. Sometimes there is bad law, that judges have to figure out. Look at the destruction of the ADA by the supreme court. It's almost, if you manage to make acomodations for your disability, you are not disabled and not entitled to acomodations

Lawyers will argue what is advantageous to their case. They will try to skirt, discredit, what does not help them. In my case they argue that I did not need time off and they had already accomodated me by allowing me time off. They also argue that a software engineer only uses the keyboard 20% of the time (most of the time is looking at the screen).

RSI injured employee wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

Though law is supposed to be logical (which we all are :) it is not always.

There are judges that make bad decisions, but justify it by (mis)applying case law. Sometimes there is bad law, that judges have to figure out. Look at the destruction of the ADA by the supreme court. It's almost, if you manage to make acomodations for your disability, you are not disabled and not entitled to acomodations

Lawyers will argue what is advantageous to their case. They will try to skirt, discredit, what does not help them. In my case they argue that I did not need time off and they had already accomodated me by allowing me time off. They also argue that a software engineer only uses the keyboard 20% of the time (most of the time is looking at the screen).

RSI injured employee wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

First of all, there was no gag order on the site. The payment of $140k may be a paltry sum to you, but it is much more than a nuisance amount. The $140k was a rule 68 judgment, not a settlement that would be subject to any sort of confidentiality agreement.

Some of it may be personality, that I don't give up when I am right. That I asserted my rights and after trying to work with them, I demanded my rights. You have not dealt with the MSI management (from what you said).

MSI did have a good benefits package. The package included short term and long term disability policies. These policies paid me for the same illness and time off that I was fired for taking(the insurance company would not pay the money unless they determined that I could not work, insurance companies don't pay out money to be nice).

Mattel is continuing this case. Even though Mattel paid the judgment, they continue with a libel suit. Neither MSI, TLC, or Mattel prior to filing suit stated what was factually incorrect in 3 year. Have you?

You are right, anyone who sticks up for their rights must be either a loser or mentally ill!

My site has helped others going though similar problems, is it wrong to help?

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

OOooop, that was a mistake. That machine was preloaded with Windows. Where is my Linux install disks?

Injured worker wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

It's a smart move by the bank. That way their mistakes won't be caught.

If the bank screws up, an OS/2 or Linux user is smart enough to figure it out.

A Windows user is still running Windows, need I say more?

RSI Injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates.

This is a good first step. It would have been better if this case was dismissed.

The problem with litigating free speech issues is that it still costs to fight.

Mattel is trying to litigate me into silence! After Mattel paying me over $140k in a judgment, they still continue with a countersuit for libel because I posted my case against them on my website. At no time prior to them filing the suit, the told me what was factually incorrect about the site.

It seems a pattern that companies have been using large legal teams and deep pockets to quiet dissent and to get advantage.

This is a good first step. It would have been better if this case was dismissed.

The problem with litigating free speech issues is that it still costs to fight.

Mattel is trying to litigate me into silence! After Mattel paying me over $140k in a judgment, they still continue with a countersuit for libel because I posted my case against them on my website. At no time prior to them filing the suit, the told me what was factually incorrect about the site.

It seems a pattern that companies have been using large legal teams and deep pockets to quiet dissent and to get advantage.

It's a compbination of things, but fit and position that is important!

Instead of a $2000 desk, you can attach a $150 keyboard arm to the desk. Have the mouse next to the keyboard so as not to have to reach for it.

The Split keyboards are only useful as long as they can be made to fit you. The MS keyboard did me more harm than good.

What also is important is taking breaks from the keyboard, stretching, positioning, and proper treatment.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!

I was not meaning this as a slam of the "evil empire." I was pointing this out as a reverse engineering case that had hit the courts.

In the Stac v. MS case, M$ sued because Stac had reversed engineered how to load drivers before the config.sys was processed. In Vault v. Quad (sp) Quad had implemented copy protection breaking by reversing the copy protection. This was prohibited via shrink wrap license agreement. The shrikwrap license agreement was thrown out. You must keep in mind, that this was tried in Louisiana, which has a French influence on it's laws.

RSI injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates.

This is similar to what Microsoft did to Stac! When Stac sued MS, MS sued Stac for reverse engineering.

Injured geek wins against Mattel, Mattel still retaliates!