Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Toyota Claims Woman "Opted In" To Faux Email Stalking

Posted by timothy on from the give-marketing-new-prescriptions dept.

An anonymous reader writes "ABC News is reporting that a California woman is suing Toyota for $10 million for sending her email that appeared to be from a criminal stalker. The woman claims the emails terrified her to the point that she suffered sleeplessness, poor work performance, etc. Toyota says the ruse was part of a marketing campaign for the Toyota Matrix. A Toyota spokesman says they are not liable for the woman's distress, because 'The person who made this claim specifically opted in, granting her permission to receive campaign emails and other communications from Toyota.'"

6 of 667 comments (clear)

  1. Advertising these days... by vekrander · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Advertising gets weirder and weirder. I don't understand how this is supposed to get someone to buy a car. The only thing I could think of is she didn't had a car so maybe she's supposed to buy a Toyota so she can get the hell away? I think it's lost on me.

    1. Re:Advertising these days... by spun · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not designed to get the stalkee to buy cars. It's designed to get the friend that set them up to buy cars. The friend is now in collusion with Toyota, they share a dirty little secret, they're friends now...

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  2. Possible CAN SPAM implications by Shishio · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So either she didn't see the opt-out links or address of the company, or the email didn't have these. Unless they got really creative with the opt-in, this sounds like a violation of the CAN SPAM act. A $10M lawsuit from one woman is the least of their worries.

    --
    Twelve fingers or one, its how you play. ~Gattaca (Vincent)
  3. "Informed consent" = no way by yali · · Score: 5, Interesting

    FTFA:

    Tepper, Duick's attorney, said he discussed the campaign with Toyota's attorneys earlier this year, and they said the "opting in" Harp referred to was done when Duick's friend e-mailed her a "personality test" that contained a link to an "indecipherable" written statement that Toyota used as a form of consent from Duick.

    Tepper, said that during those legal negotiations, Toyota's lawyers claimed Duick signed the written legal agreement, which they said amounts to "informed written consent." [emphasis added]

    I work in research with human subjects, and there is no way this constitutes informed consent.

    If Toyota wants to argue that the fine print spelled it out and it's her fault she didn't read it carefully enough, maybe they can win the case through legalistic hairsplitting. But if they buried it in fine print and incomprehensible language, they're jerks no matter what.

    But they're making a much broader claim if they're calling it informed consent. Informed consent means that she comprehended what was going to happen to her as a result of agreeing. In other words, "informed consent" isn't just a statement about the objective content of the opt-in statement -- it's an assertion about the state of mind of the person who gave consent. If she had truly given informed consent, then not only would she have no legal claim, but she'd have no moral claim either (because she'd have known what she was getting into). But it's blindingly obvious that that isn't true here.

  4. Sooo... by MrSenile · · Score: 4, Interesting

    [Hypothetical Situation:]

    I jokingly said to the Toyota person 'oh sure, you can send me threatening email, but then I get to come to your store in the middle of the night and slash all the tires of your vehicles'. We both had a great laugh over it, shook hands, and we walked away.

    2 death threats later, and Goodyear is having a wonderful fiscal year.

    [/Hypothetical]

    Somehow, I doubt Toyota would be as easily forgiving if the tables were reversed. So why should this women have to cave in?

  5. Re:Yep by JohnFen · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't wonder why she never reported it to the police: its' because this entire episode, including her and her complaint, is a fake. The news story itself is the actual marketing campaign for Toyota (and Saatchi & Saatchi), not the events it relates. Why else would the marketing company put an actual sales blurb into the article?

    It's a reverse psych-out, and we're the ones they're trying to punk