Slashdot Mirror


Woman Facing $3,500 Fine For Posting Online Review

sabri writes "Jen Palmer tried to order something from kleargear.com, some sort of cheap ThinkGeek clone. The merchandise never arrived and she wrote a review on ripoffreport.com. Now, kleargear.com is reporting her to credit agencies and sending collectors to fetch $3,500 as part of a clause which did not exist at the alleged time of purchase. 'By email, a person who did not identify him or herself defended the $3500 charge referring again to Kleargear.com's terms of sale. As for Jen being threatened — remove the post or face a fine — the company said that was not blackmail but rather a, "diligent effort to help them avoid [the fine]."' The terms and conditions shouldn't even apply, since the sales transaction was never completed."

61 of 519 comments (clear)

  1. A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Press2ToContinue · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh Slashdot - you're so edgy. Calm down.

    --
    Sent from my ENIAC
    1. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was going to comment that Dice hasn't done anything to ruin thinkgeek yet, but they don't actually own that one.

    2. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by synapse7 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think I come to this site out of long term habit more than anything else.

    3. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Informative

      What's so great about ThinkGeek anyway? When it comes down to it, they're basically just a seller of novelty gadgets and boys toys with a geek-oriented marketing angle.

      You really don't know?

      I've ranted about them previously, but to tl;dr that, the problem is that in (rather successfully) using this angle to sell their gimmicks, they presented and promoted a relentlessly consumerist view of what it is to be a geek... both by exploting the need to identify and belong (show how much of a proud geek and/or fan of this geek-popular TV show you are by owning this gizmo!) and by flattery (owning this stuff shows that you're clever!).

      They seem to have been one of the first places I know of to cater to geeks. They don't just have look it's shinny things, but things, even if they are toys, that are interesting in their own right.

    4. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I put the part in bold from his comment but it seems it was masked by the quote.

      "they're basically just a seller of novelty gadgets and boys toys with a geek-oriented marketing angle." is why.

      It was the first popular one stop shop for most of the cool and interesting crap I could waste my money on. They seemed to focus more on fun then necessity too. They came up with witty slogans and put them on everything and it is something that a lot of geeks either "just got" or wondered why it wasn't obvious to them once they figured it out.

      In short, the reason is because they are or were the Cabelas of the geek world even if their crap was cheaply made and overly priced.

  2. Hello Streisand Effect by rossz · · Score: 5, Funny

    kleargear will soon discover how the internet works.

    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
    1. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They already are. They're removing all comments from their facebook page.

    2. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really they should discover how their State's Attorney General works.
      I'm a strong advocate for Corporate Death Sentences and banning corporate officers from owning or running another corporation for X years.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by kermyt · · Score: 5, Informative

      And now they have disallowed all commants on their FB page.

    4. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Fjandr · · Score: 4, Funny

      Indeed. I'd like to see some corporate death sentences handed down.

    5. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is always *my* reaction. In my state, you don't have to hire a lawyer most of the time for this kind of thing. You call the state AG's consumer protection office and they contact the firm that's harassing you. Once they (or their lawyers, or assignees or whatever) find out you don't have to hire a lawyer yourself, they back off fast. Their game is picking on people who can't defend themselves.

      If your state doesn't work this way, then you should elect a different state government.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    6. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But not their posts.

      Hundreds of negative things here, but instead of one-word posts, the clause should be posted.

      BUYER BEWARE
      In an effort to ensure fair and honest public feedback, and to prevent the publishing of libelous content in any form, your acceptance of this sales contract prohibits you from taking any action that negatively impacts KlearGear.com, its reputation, products, services, management or employees.

      Should you violate this clause, as determined by KlearGear.com in its sole discretion, you will be provided a seventy-two (72) hour opportunity to retract the content in question. If the content remains, in whole or in part, you will immediately be billed $3,500.00 USD for legal fees and court costs until such complete costs are determined in litigation. Should these charges remain unpaid for 30 calendar days from the billing date, your unpaid invoice will be forwarded to our third party collection firm and will be reported to consumer credit reporting agencies until paid.

    7. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      And now their FB page has been deleted.

  3. Diligent Efforts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All this diligent effort to quash her negative review or help them avoid supposed fines - too bad none of that effort couldn't be put to satisfying the customer in the first place or correct their mistake.

  4. Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Never ever buy anything from kleargear.com. They might ruin your credit for it.

    In fact... lets just pop that right into the hosts file right now. Just in case i forget.

    Just another shady fly by nite rip off site. Lets get this woman some donations so she can sue the shit out of them.

    1. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      like hell it can't.

      since that kleargear fine hit our (actually, it was my husband's report, not mine) credit, we've been consistently denied for various financing... incluing trying to get our furance replaced when it died on us last month. we had to get a second car for my husband's new job, and it took them a month to find a bank willing to finance us all because of this bullshit charge on our credit.

    2. Re:Hint taken. by lgw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Making a false report to a credit agency runs into laws with real teeth. It's one of the few places where you're personally and criminally liable for how you do business, even if you work for a big corporation.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:Hint taken. by systemeng · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Federal Law also allows state attorneys general to file suit on behalf of tax papyers in credit reporting cases. A local lawn care service accidentally submitted an already paid bill of mine to a collections agency. The Alabama Attorney General's Office was not amused and forced them to write a letter explaining themselves to me and then suggested that I sue the company which by then had seen the error in their ways.

  5. Unconscionable Contract clause by imp · · Score: 5, Informative

    First, it's not clear a contract was established. And even if it was, unilateral changes generally are unenforceable. And even if it were there when the attempted purchase was attempted, this is an unconscionable contract clause, against public policy (1st amendment, etc) and should be thrown out.

    This person's best bet is to dispute the credit reports, counter sue for whatever they can think of to recover legal fees.

    If it were me, I'd just send them a letter telling them to go F themselves and I'll see you in court. Bring it. My lawyer, however, would likely wish that I not do that.

    1. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First, it's not clear a contract was established.

      Looks to me like if there was a contract at all, kleargear breached it first by failing to deliver the items ordered.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Spazmania · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Contracts of adhesion (unilateral contracts) are generally enforceable but they are "interpreted against the drafter" meaning that any ambiguity is interpreted in favor of the customer.

      Click-through contracts are less likely to be enforceable than something bearing a physical signature. Add a little unconscionability and no court in the land would uphold that contract. If there even was a contract.

      The magic word you're looking for, though, is Libel. These jokers deliberately published a false statement of fact to the credit reporting agencies with the intention of damaging the individual's reputation. That's a cha-ching if you take 'em to court.

      However, this part of the story doesn't quite ring true for me. The credit reporting agencies don't like to accept reports without an SSN. Too high a risk they get applied to the wrong person. So how did folks paid via paypal get enough information to attach a complaint to the person's credit report? Maybe I just don't know enough about how the reporting agencies work but for darn sure there's nothing on my credit report from anyone who didn't have my SSN.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    3. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by OglinTatas · · Score: 4, Funny

      Let your lawyer craft the letter. He would be able to couch it in unimpeachable legalese and would still be able to include your general sentiments.

      It would probably be worded along the lines of: "We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram."

    4. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by ModernGeek · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your lawyer? Any real slashdotter would represent himself all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States and change every other precedent set before them.
      Just ask one, every true slashdot user knows more about the law than anybody else in the legal community.

      Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, more importantly I am not your lawyer. This is not legal advise and should not be construed as such.

      --
      Sig: I stole this sig.
    5. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by romco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > dispute the credit reports

      Dispute it with kleargear.com first. Then dispute with the credit reporting agency. Use registered mail so you have proof.

      If they verify you owe them money sue them under the FDCPA in federal court for attempting to collect a debt that is not due. ($1000 per offence plus any legal costs)

      Let them try to prove a contract exists in federal court.

      --
      AdFuel
    6. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not so much that as it is fraud. Claiming someone's responsible for a clause they never actually agreed to, and billing them for it is fraud. Submitting that bill to a collections agency is fraud and harassment. There shouldn't be a lawsuit. The operator of that site should be arrested. And then there should be a lawsuit.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  6. Welp this will not end well by Malenx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    streisand effect ... Streisand Effect ... STREISAND EFFECT... HOOOO!!!

  7. "the sales transaction was never completed" by themushroom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Which is the whole reason why there's a bad review. Seems Kleargear would want to fix that transaction before spending buttloads on dubious litigation, and win the customer back. But they'll discover how both the Internet AND retail business works soon.

    1. Re:"the sales transaction was never completed" by N0Man74 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Indeed. The sale was never completed.

      "In an effort to ensure fair and honest public feedback, and to prevent the publishing of libelous content in any form, your acceptance of this sales contract prohibits you from taking any action that negatively impacts KlearGear.com, its reputation, products, services, management or employees."

      If there was never a completed sale, then do the sale terms even apply even if they hadn't of changed them later?

      If the glove wasn't bought, she owes them... not?

  8. Re:in sue happy america by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's how the system is supposed to work. I'm assuming you went to small claims court, right? Small claims courts can't offer injunctive relief (i.e., a court order compelling her to keep the animal off your property), all they can do is offer monetary relief, and you didn't have any monetary damages.

    Frankly I think that's a pretty silly thing to sue over and it must have made you really popular in the neighborhood. There's a ton of effective ways to keep cats out of your yard, ranging from harmless (garden hose) to nasty (anti-freeze), hardly seems like something worth dragging the courts into.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  9. Give them a call! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can also reach us by phone or snail mail at:

      You should give them a call, let them know what you think.
    KLEARGEAR.COM
    2885 Sanford Ave SW Suite #19886
    Grandville, MI 49418
    Se Habla Español
    Phone (866) 598-4296

    1. Re:Give them a call! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Don't bother with regular mail. it appears to be a mail forwarding facility: http://www.mailboxforwarding.com/form1583.php

    2. Re:Give them a call! by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean to say that Sanford Ave doesn't have 19,886 suites?!

  10. Next Headline: by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 4, Funny
    "Slashdot Submitter sabri Facing $3,500 Fine"

    After submitting an article in which kleargear.com was referred to as "some sort of cheap ThinkGeek clone", Slashdot user sabri will be facing several thousand dollars in fines. The stupid asses at kleargear.com don't seem to realize that this sort of thing only gets them bad press. [Editors note: The remainder of this comment has been removed as kleargear.com is threatening Dice Holdings if defamation of their good name continues on our properties.]

  11. My KlearGear.com Review by MonkeyPaw · · Score: 3, Funny

    Recently I purchased several items from KlearGear.com. Based on their purchase agreement, I can not post negative comments on the Internet about my experience. With that in mind, here is my KlearGear.com review;

    " --- "

    Thank you,

    --
    My studio - www.graylands.ca
    1. Re:My KlearGear.com Review by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, I'm sure you can do better than that.

      I recently purchased several items from KlearGear.com. Their purchase agreement prohibits negative comments, so here is my review:

      The can of SPAM® was greatly appreciated. It makes a much better doorstop than the one I ordered, because the metal shards really dig into the rug. Even better, unlike the boxes of SPAM® you buy at the grocery store, this one came with a large hole in the side, so I didn't even have to find a can opener before sucking out the meaty goodness.

      The packaging was in impeccable condition, having only been run over by three UPS trucks—a far cry from the usual twelve. And their customer service can't be beaten. I only had to call 150 times over the course of a three month period to reach someone who helpfully pointed out that I could step on the can of SPAM® I received and use it as a doorstop. And the agents' language was truly amazing. I learned over a hundred new swear words in five languages.

      In short, I cannot recommend this business more highly if you enjoy surprise delivery of products that do not resemble what you ordered and learning how to say f*** off in Swahili while talking to a customer service representative in Tanzania. I know I sure do.

      No one can claim that this is a negative review. :-D

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  12. Non-Disparagement Clause by loonycyborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If it were in any way legal or enforceable it would be in ToS everywhere.

  13. Re:in sue happy america by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Informative

    The only people who get rich by going to court are the lawyers.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  14. CFPB by Nick · · Score: 5, Informative

    She needs to go to http://cfpb.gov/ right away and report this. It'll come off her credit reports ~30 days or so later. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was setup for exactly this kind of thing.

    --
    Fuck Ajit Pai
    1. Re:CFPB by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, the CFPD was set up to ensure that big banks will get bailed out the next time they make a high risk gamble with other people's money and it goes bad. However, they had to give is a name that made people think it was about protecting the little guy

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  15. Just hold on now by Jiro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If everything is as described, sure, the woman has been mistreated. But on the other hand, she's using Ripoff Report. Slashdot has done an article about a case involving Ripoff Report before, and they themselves absolutely refuse to remove even false information, and then charge people money to dispute it. It's at least as bad as the company she's fighting.

    Look it up. Here, I'll help you. Read the very links described here: "She contacted Ripoffreport.com to ask that the post be removed but Ripoffreport.com won't let her without paying $2000 she says."

    Or go read some of the comments in the earlier article describing how Ripoff Report behaves. http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/29/1929228/court-rules-website-doesnt-have-to-remove-defamatory-comments

  16. Shut Up Already About the Streisand Effect by dmomo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Streisand Effect is not a rule. It's a rarity. For every story that gets attention this way, there are millions that do not.

    When I see a post on Slashdot about censorship backfiring, without fail, someone will blurt out "Streisand Effect" as if it is an inevitable thing that happens when censorship occurs on the Internet.

    The trouble here is that assuming this is a rule and not a rare edge case brings with it the danger of promoting the idea that censorship is not able to occur on the Internet. ...as if it is inherently censor-proof. The sad thing is, censorship is very real. The stories that allow us to cry "ha ha Streisand Effect" are the exception. They are interesting and attention worthy, or simply lucky.

    I'm glad when the effect occurs, but don't kid yourself.

  17. ripoffreport.com is part of the problem by wwalker · · Score: 3, Informative

    While I have absolutely no sympathy for all the hate that the keangear asshats will get from this, I just wish that ripoffreport.com would get their share of it. Did you know that if you pay them money, they will happily turn all the negative reports about your business into positive? They call it "Corporate Advocacy Program", but the real name of it should be "blackmail and extortion". Absolutely anyone can post anything about any business, be it true or a complete lie, and the business owner has absolutely no way for defending themselves. Except if you pay ripoffreport.com a few hundred bucks and then all negative reports go away. And they even claim that they will help place the newly positive reviews "at the top of search engines", whatever the hell that means. See, they do it to benefit the consumer and to assure the complete satisfaction, and not at all to blackmail small businesses and extort money from them:
    http://www.ripoffreport.com/CorporateAdvocacyProgram/Change-Report-From-Negative-To-Positive.aspx

  18. Re:in sue happy america by meerling · · Score: 3, Informative

    True, and to earn the hatred of all cat owners.
    Besides, a hose, supersoaker, or the like works well.
    On the other hand, if you don't want to sit around waiting to soak the local felines, just go buy some of the scent based repellents. There are a number of them for sale in pet stores, and a bunch of old fashioned recipes you can make yourself.
    Killing or maiming someones pet is just going to get you in so much shit the cat poop would seem to be gold nuggets in comparison.
    (I know one person that ended up moving over the harassment he got when he shot a neighbors cat. Also, every potted plant and his entire lawn died. It's assumed that one or more persons put herbicide on all of them.)
    Same thing with dogs. Actually, any family pet.

  19. (866) 598-4296 by frovingslosh · · Score: 4, Informative

    Their phone number is (866) 598-4296. They will pay for the call for you to call them and tell them what you think.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:(866) 598-4296 by mythosaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      If only they had a toll-free fax number.

      I still own a plain-paper fax, black construction paper, and a roll of tape.

      Mobius fax, FTW.

      They're probably busy. I'll fax them after they leave for the weekend.

  20. Credit Reporting Agencies by Spiked_Three · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do you realize that credit reporting agencies are 'regulated' and that means absolutely nothing?

    All that smoke and mirrors they put out about checking your credit report, and fixing errors, doesn't really happen. It is there ONLY so the consumer thinks credit reporting is fair. The fact is the credit reporting agency 1) makes more money from you 2) ignores your request to fix items. Why should they care? You CAN NOT sue them. Bet you didn't know that did you? Only a state's attorney Generals can sue a credit reporting agency. That is part of the deal they got to support fair credit laws in the first place. Like just about everything else in this country lately, they had a huge lobbying effort to exclude themselves from lawsuits, took all your representatives to steak and lobster dinner, and called it something that sounded like it was made to protect the consumer. IT IS NOT!

    If you go through the trouble of writing them to correct something, they just send you a generic letter; "We do not understand your request." Since you can not sue, that is the end of it.

    So the root of this problem is both the slimey business, but as much the slimey credit reporting agencies that make it a viable business model. Experian will even sell social securrity numbers to crooks now to make money;

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/10/25/experian_data_broker_social_security_numbers_sold_to_identity_thieves.html

    --
    slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
    1. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by ageoffri · · Score: 4, Informative
      Pretty much everything you stated is wrong. You can sue all three of the consumer credit reporting agencies in small claims court assuming you followed the processes outlined in the federal laws for consumer protection.

      http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/special/19990820.asp

      Check out creditboards.com and the ficoforums.myfico.com and you will find multiple success stories of people suing one or more of the CRA's.

      I can also say that from personal experience that merely making the threat to the CRA that you will be suing them in small claims court with proper citations will cause the CRA to fix their errors.

      --
      -- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
    2. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by ageoffri · · Score: 3
      Apparently you didn't read the article. So I'll quote the part that matters.

      "The Fair Credit Reporting Act, which governs credit reporting, says that only a state's attorney general can sue a creditor for furnishing inaccurate information. But if the creditor doesn't fix the inaccuracy permanently and in a reasonable time, you can sue, even though the Fair Credit Reporting Act doesn't explicitly give you that option."

      The reason that people can sue is on the grounds of the CRA not fixing inaccurate information. The article makes it very clear that the public uses those grounds to sue, not the grounds of providing inaccurate information. So yes you can sue and it happens all the time, people win quite often against the CRA's when they do their homework. Especially effective in a few states like Texas and California where you can also use State level laws in addition to the federal.

      --
      -- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
  21. Re:in sue happy america by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Informative

    Doesn't matter, you can still go to jail for cruelty to an animal for shooting one with a BB gun - in some areas it's a felony. It's not all that much different than if you shot their kid with a BB. "Bah, it's only a small welt" isn't going to convince the judge...

    Besides... YOU'LL PUT YOUR EYE OUT!

  22. Re:in sue happy america by Shakrai · · Score: 3

    This person's girlfriend accidentally killed a pet rabbit by not remembering to feed it, and she is facing jail time.

    For what charge, and in which jurisdiction??

    In my state that would be a Class A Misdemeanor, at most, and you don't do jail time for those unless there are aggravating circumstances and/or you already have a lengthy criminal record.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  23. Re:ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by mythosaz · · Score: 3, Informative

    I ordered hundreds of dollars of equipment from dx.com/dealextreme.com over the years.

    The absolute worst things that's happened to me is that something was out of stock, and they credited me for my order.

    Say what you want about ordering things on the slow boat from China, but DX, overall, has pretty good customer service -- especially for a company that'll send you a $2.97 butane torch (filled with butane!) from Asia, shipping included.

    http://dx.com/p/jet-1300-c-butane-lighter-1320

    My cigars thank them.

  24. Re:in sue happy america by lgw · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where I grew up, shooting a kid with a shotgun (loaded with rock salt) was considered an object lesson about property rights, and we'd have been shocked if anyone went to jail for it. How times have changed.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  25. Re:Well.. by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Are you kidding? With the right lawyer (or DA, or even consumer protection agency), it's a great way for her to eviscerate kleargear.com for fraudulent practice.

    The stupid 'you can't say we ripped you off even if we do, nyah nyah' clause that kleargear.com chucked into their site is patently unenforceable. It's like my dumbassed last employer who tried to force everyone laid off to sign a 'non-disparagement' clause, holding their severence pay ransom unless they did. (one phone call to my own lawyer right there in the office stopped that BS cold.)

    By the way, it wouldn't take much to dispute the "fine" with the reporting agencies, either.

    As for the negative publicity? Is the old fuckedcompany.com still running? I don't feel much like tickling the company proxy here to find out...

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  26. Re:in sue happy america by Karzz1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    She let a rabbit *starve* to death. Think about that for a minute. You don't "accidentally forget" to feed an animal in your care for days on end. That is animal abuse plain and simple and would also fall into the category of torture. Both of these are (low-level) felonies in all states to the best of my knowledge.

    To be honest, both of these people sound like the dregs of society and not anyone I would want to admit associating with.

    --
    Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
  27. Re:in sue happy america by GameMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow, I'd imagine that'd make Cheney-style hunting accidents kind of awkward...

    --

    Rules of Conduct:
    #1 - The DM is always right.
    #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
  28. Re:in sue happy america by lgw · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A shotgun loaded with rocksalt can as easily kill one as it was loaded with lead.

    Not beyond about 3 feet, rocksalt isn't exactly aerodynamic (plus sine you have to load those yourself in the first place, it's not like you're going to use a full charge.

    So you did it? And you where lucky not to kill anyone? And now you are bragging about it?

    Did you miss the part about "where I grew up". Buddy of mind got shot - stings like a bitch. I got bit by dogs set on me. We both did a lot of running away.

    But those were different times - you'd walk out into the woods in the morning, and parents wouldn't care where you were till sunset (and no one wore pads to ride anything, though you could wear a particularly heavy coat while sledding and not be taken for a wimp needing a good beating).

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  29. Re:Well.. by SCPRedMage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's only "unenforceable" from a legal standpoint, but before it ever even sees a courtroom, it's already intimidated enough people to raise the company's BBB rating from an F to a B, and ruined other people's credit; the couple from TFA have been turned down for loans due to the credit hit they've taken because these guys sent that $3500 "penalty" to collections.

    Why pay court costs for a judge to enforce your schemes when you can get the credit bureaus to do it for free?

    --
    My sig can beat up your sig.
  30. Re:Well.. by almitydave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well then it seems the couple has suffered real financial harm. Hopefully they can quantify this and collect damages. I hate the sue-happy culture of the US these days, but this case demonstrates exactly what lawsuits are for.

    There's no way the company can claim ignorance due to the facts:
    -The transaction was never completed, so the contract didn't apply
    -The contract at the time (that didn't apply anyway) didn't include the clause about reviews
    -The person attempting to purchase the item, and who would have been bound by the contract (but wasn't) wasn't the person who wrote the review

    These are all facts that were plain at the time of the company's action; so in other words, they knowingly filed a false credit claim based on a non-existent clause in a contract that didn't apply to someone with whom they didn't do business anyway.

    Our prisons are already full, so I think the appropriate penalty would be massive fines against the company, and all legal and executive personnel involved in this action, and if that can't be accurately determined, all legal and executive personnel.

    --
    my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
    I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
  31. Re:Well.. by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fuckedcompany seems to be down since 2007.

    But you are right, any lawyer could have a field day with them. Especially if the story summery is correct. If her husband purchased the gifts, then it would have been him not her that agreed to any EULA no matter how stupid it might have been. So by going after her, who hasn't even agreed to the terms, they are literally doing something fraudulent and possibly criminal to boot.

  32. Re: in sue happy america by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The antisocial people are the ones who let their dogs roam wild. I've had two cats in my life that were killed by dogs. Both were in my yard. And I've observed other dogs (also off-leash) chase my cat through my yard. I was a kid for the first one, but on both other occasions I reminded the dog owner that they should consider themselves notified that I felt threatened by their pet, and that failure to follow the leash laws and control a dangerous animal was ample grounds for me to defend myself with deadly force. The second time a pet died, it was the neighbor's dogs who did it. They got out all the time, even menaced my wife in the garage (and she's a lifelong dog owner, knows how to handle them well). After I told her that the next time I saw them in my yard, I would return them in the same condition as my cat, they stopped getting out. That was over five years ago. Zero escapes since then. Amazing how that works.

  33. Re:in sue happy america by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Where I grew up, shooting a kid with a shotgun (loaded with rock salt) was considered an object lesson about property rights, and we'd have been shocked if anyone went to jail for it. How times have changed.

    I remember at 12-13 yo in the mid-'70s, the family lived for a time (father in civil service-transfers were fast-track grade advancement) in south-central MS near the eastern MS/western AL border. There was this old farmer that raised huge patches of watermelons and strawberries that all the kids knew would shoot at you with this old break-action double-barrel 12ga loaded with rock-salt shells (though he couldn't see at distance worth beans) if he spotted you in his fields (and sometimes actually grazed the occasional slow/careless kid with a piece or two, usually one kid a season).

    Everybody in the surrounding area knew this and him, including the police & sheriff. That was the way things had been for as long as many if not most who lived there could remember, even as they were kids.

    Nobody even thought to call the police. They'd have simply told you that "...you ought-not to be a-trespassin' on no private prop-perty. Ev'rbody know the ol' man'll light bee-hines wit rocksalt if'n he catches ya in is fields! Ya'll'll get hurt ya keep it up, an' if we gotsta carry ya'll to the horsepital, we'd be 'bliged to charge ya'll wit trespass." (there *were* signs).

    The old boy sat in a rocking chair on his porch and typically never even stood to shoot. The range was like anywhere from 60 to 100-plus yards. He also loaded these shells of his really light on powder charge. If you had on jeans all you'd get is a nice welt if you were closer.

    The only two times I remember any blood having been drawn or any skin penetration or other injury (other than self-inflicted) occurring was when the two kids in question didn't pay attention, had gotten far too close, and were wearing shorts. Only one small piece barely penetrated skin both times, though from the way they'd each screamed at the time, I'm sure it burned like hell.

    The first "strawberry-heart" medal-winner popped out the little salt fragment with his own thumbnails, wiped it hydrogen peroxide, stuck a band-aid on it, and carried on. Next season, the other medal-winner's piece of salt was so small it had dissolved before the kid had stopped running, and left but a single drop of blood, a welt, and a painful memory.

    I was always careful to stay at the edge of his range, kept real low, and never stayed long or ate/took very much on the occasions I was pressured to join in. We didn't hurt the old man's harvest. He had these huge fields, but a lot of what grew he never picked and it rotted in the fields.

    I do "distinctly* remember what the sound of rock salt sounds like whizzing around/past you from a 12ga, some making weird "ricochet"-type whining, moaning, or buzzing sounds, striking vegetation around you, etc.

    Nothing like it to get those legs really moving!

    It's downright motuh-VAY-shunul! :D

    CoD!?!? Bah! Back in *my* day, we went out unarmed and deliberately got shot at with *real* guns just for *fun*!!! :D

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.