Criticize Online, Get Fined

maxpublic writes "Yet another outspoken critic of corporate America has been SLAPP'ed - only this time, Dan Whatley didn't even know he'd been sued until he was presented with a $450,000 judgement. For those who don't know, SLAPP stands for 'Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation' and is used to silence people who openly criticize thin-skinned corporations." In this case the company doing to suing is Xybernaut, the makers of wearable computers mentioned here many times in the past. This article is a must read. And now Xybernaut has joined Amazon and others on my list of Must-Avoid companies. This is a creepy run around the 1st Ammendment, and you should be aware.

Comments

Another SLAPP.

[dotderf]

Mattel has been trying to kill this site. Now the guy turned around and is suing Mattel for $48 million for violating the ADA and some other laws. Glad to see the censorship by litigation people getting slapped back.

Re:someone's lying, but who?

[davecb]

... the Xybernaut lawyer handling the case against Whatley, said Whatley had been served notice of the lawsuit by certified mail. Note that he said certified mail, not registered mail. That means different things in different jurisdictions: I once used (Canadian) certified mail to put my landlord on notice, only to find that it didn't guarantee delivery, or provide me notification of non-delivery. If the same is true in Virginia, the lawyer could technically be telling the truth, while actually telling what logicians consider a "lie of omission".

Re:someone's lying, but who?

[zmooc]

Does it even matter at all if he got the letter, if he lied about it or even if he told the truth about this company? It's very VERY clear he's telling his opinion and the moment people get fined for telling their opinion is the moment the US can be considerd on par with China and many other countries they can't stand. Emigrate while you can!

Re:harry potter

[wurp]

No, Rowling will lose her trademark if she doesn't protect it. I'm pretty sure that doesn't apply to copyright or patents, just trademarks.

Re:someone's lying, but who?

[Reziac]

Due Process per the 5th amendment applies ONLY to CRIMINAL prosecution; it has absolutely nothing to do with CIVIL suits. In civil suits, you are effectively deemed guilty by the accusation itself, and it is up to YOU to prove your innocence. If you don't show up to defend yourself, regardless of the reason why -- tough shit, you lose.

BTW, under some child welfare and animal abuse statutes, there is also no due process -- you are presumed guilty until proven innocent. This is why in some states (California for one), children are sometimes removed from a home based entirely on unfounded, *anonymous* "tips" alleging abuse. In those cases, you also have no right to face your accuser.

Yes, THAT is probably unconstitutional, but look how far anyone gets fighting other legislative or judicial stupidity committed in the name of "for the children".

not exactly correct.

[www.sorehands.com]

Mattel had tried to kill http://www.sorehands.com/mattel. When the judge asked Mattel's lawyer what was libelous, Mattel's lawyer asked that their libel claim be dismissed. This was after having to file a 5 inche stack of legal briefs with the court.

Since their libel claim was that they were libeled because I said that they violated the FMLA, ADA, MGL c.151B (the Mass. version of the ADA), I was able to bring this under those laws. Those laws specifically allow for punitive damages, where simple abuse of process does not.