> Where is the 1st Amendment in these PetsWarehouse lawsuits?
The 1st Amendment doesn't apply here. It prevents the government from limiting your free speech (Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, religion, etc...). It says nothing about a private citizen attempting to limit the free speech of another, through frivolous lawsuits, or any other means.
Is it wrong? You bet! Is it unconstitutional? Unfortunately, no.
Actually it is at least partially related to the prior lawsuits.
In claims 24 through 28, Novak is referring to archives of the original posts that started the first lawsuit. He wants Google to delete stuff from their "groups" directory of rec.aquaria.freshwater.plants so no one else can tell that it ever happened.
quote-> 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./quote
But Google is based in CA. Did he serve them or not????
It's technically not unconstitutional.
The 1st amendment prevents the government from affecting your free speech ("Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, etc. etc.").
It says nothing about a private citizen attempting to stop prevent the free speech of another.
Slashdot Mirror
> Where is the 1st Amendment in these PetsWarehouse lawsuits?
The 1st Amendment doesn't apply here. It prevents the government from limiting your free speech (Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, religion, etc...). It says nothing about a private citizen attempting to limit the free speech of another, through frivolous lawsuits, or any other means.
Is it wrong? You bet!
Is it unconstitutional? Unfortunately, no.
Simple - Because they couldn't afford the time and money to mount a protracted legal defense.
No matter how baseless the suit, it takes money to fight it.
Actually it is at least partially related to the prior lawsuits.
In claims 24 through 28, Novak is referring to archives of the original posts that started the first lawsuit. He wants Google to delete stuff from their "groups" directory of rec.aquaria.freshwater.plants so no one else can tell that it ever happened.
quote-> 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. /quote
But Google is based in CA. Did he serve them or not????
It's technically not unconstitutional. The 1st amendment prevents the government from affecting your free speech ("Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, etc. etc."). It says nothing about a private citizen attempting to stop prevent the free speech of another.
Too late, Novak (Pets Warehouse) already tried suing Pet Warehouse for trademark infringement.