They are spying on us, reporting on us, and rating us

ScottM

ScottM

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
42,529
Location
Variable, but somewhere on earth
Display Name
Display name:
iBazinga!
No I am not talking about the FBI so this is not a Spin Zone topic.

One of my friends got dumped on real bad by her boyfriend. Turns out his wife did not approve of the relationship. So she has been pretty upset and mad at this guy. She sent me this link where women rate men. She is posting his info on there, he deserves it too.

http://www.womansavers.com/

For fun I looked up a few cities just to see if there was anyone I knew. No joy though.
 
heh. I glanced at it - from some of the photos of the "alleged dirtbags" some of them don't look like they'd own a computer and wouldn't even know about this site.
 
Hmmmm....
Database postings and e-mail addresses are strictly confidential and we do not share or sell your information to anyone. All IP addresses are deleted daily. For the paranoid, you can post from a library, internet cyber café or business center. WomanSavers does not edit or censor database information and no information can be guaranteed or verified.
Click to expand...

In other words, lie all you want, we don't claim anything is true, and make it difficult for anyone to come after you for lying anyway. Anyone have a problem with that? How about accountability, veracity, and the ability to correct slanderous information?

Not even a disclaimer that all persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty?

Oh, I love in their terms of use
You should not rely on the information contained on WomanSavers.com to form an opinion about the person.
Click to expand...

And
In addition, according to the United States Supreme Court, two items must be proven for a libel (written) law suit.

1. Who wrote the libel (WomanSavers.com keeps no records or IP's so therefore, you must prove and subpoena the person who wrote the information.)
2. You must prove the information is untrue. The truth is 100% defense for libel and is covered under the First Amendment, Freedom of Speech. The original poster would have to testify that the written information is untrue in a court of law. WomanSavers.com members must agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy BEFORE they post. This includes that they are telling the truth.

If a correction needs to be made to a posting, anyone is free to post an automatic comment at no charge.

Please note, WomanSavers.com is not located in the United States and does not do business in the United States. We are located in the country of Costa Rica.
Click to expand...
 
An update.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DATING_SITE_LAWSUIT?SITE=AKFAI&SECTION=HOME

Cunningham's date-dissing site has tripled in size since the lawsuit was filed, with 27,000 profiles that she markets as "a new cost-effective weapon in the war on cheating men." Cunningham works full-time on the site and is developing others, including a Spanish-language version that will launch in June.
Click to expand...

And this is priceless:

Hollis, of Pittsburgh, claimed Cunningham's site is liable because it solicits negative comments but does not screen them for truthfulness. Hollis also is suing those who posted comments that questioned his sexuality and claimed he tried to dodge paying child support...One of the women has denied making any posts. Another acknowledged posting comments but denied damaging his reputation.
Click to expand...

LOL! Zing!:lightning:
 
I smell a law suit in the making.

And, it's the idiot so-called do-gooders who are bringing it on themselves.:rolleyes:
 
Actually, the web site has limited liability where it acts as a conduit for third-party posters. Note I said "limited" and not "no". In addition, you can bet that the legal fees incurred by the site in defending a lawsuit (even if they're not liable) can be staggering (see, for example, Wolk vs. AvWeb).

The right thing for the site to do is embody a system to remove unjustified or incorrect postings. Or provide a means of refuting a post.

Bitter Waitress is another example of this sort of site.

http://www.bitterwaitress.com

http://web.archive.org/web/20060329091653/www.bitterwaitress.com/std/
 
How much did AvWeb spend? It seems like they pretty much acquiesced to his demands. Did any of the other defendants have to pay anything? I don't recall ever hearing Joe really talk about what he had to pay out of pocket if anything.
 
smigaldi said:
How much did AvWeb spend? It seems like they pretty much acquiesced to his demands. Did any of the other defendants have to pay anything? I don't recall ever hearing Joe really talk about what he had to pay out of pocket if anything.
Click to expand...


I do know how much a corporation paid in legal fees to defend (not settle) a couple of these cases. Pushing 6 figures....

As for AvWeb, my bet (and I don't know this for a fact), the settlement costs were much less expensive than defending - even if they win. At this juncture, there's no "loser pays" provision (which is something I could support in tort reform).
 
smigaldi said:
How much did AvWeb spend? It seems like they pretty much acquiesced to his demands. Did any of the other defendants have to pay anything? I don't recall ever hearing Joe really talk about what he had to pay out of pocket if anything.
Click to expand...

Legal costs vary, depending on subject-matter, complexity, etc. Of course, a good way to get a rough idea is to look at the values involved.

In terms of corporate litigation, I just saw an attorney fee affidavit two days ago for nearly $300,000. That was for ten weeks worth of work involving resort development. So, property worth in the millions, but not over about $15,000,000, probably considerably less.

In corporate litigation, $15M is chump change...think about how much Merck or Pfizer is worth.

But, I also doubt that AvWeb has assets in the millions, so who knows.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Legal costs vary, depending on subject-matter, complexity, etc. Of course, a good way to get a rough idea is to look at the values involved.

In terms of corporate litigation, I just saw an attorney fee affidavit two days ago for nearly $300,000. That was for ten weeks worth of work involving resort development. So, property worth in the millions, but not over about $15,000,000, probably considerably less.

In corporate litigation, $15M is chump change...think about how much Merck or Pfizer is worth.

But, I also doubt that AvWeb has assets in the millions, so who knows.
Click to expand...

I was really looking to see specific numbers on this one. Since one of our former members had actually been named in the suit I thought that there might be some additional information that could be shared.
 
The thing that I think is irritating is the site will let you pay 25$ to remove a listing, or 10$ to edit a listing, and claims that all proceeds go to charity.

Considering their statements as others pointed out above, and the fact they make a note that they're not in US jurisdiction, I wonder how quick they'd scream for the US to cooperate if some ****ed off guy DoS'd the site?

(Disclaimer: I'm not responsible if you're listed on there, get ticked off, and actually DoS attack that website.)
 
smigaldi said:
I was really looking to see specific numbers on this one. Since one of our former members had actually been named in the suit I thought that there might be some additional information that could be shared.
Click to expand...

Really? Would you mind filling me in on what the suit was over? I've seen the plaintiff's name floated around a few times...never in a very positive light. I got the impression he was some kind of aviation attorney?

If it's a good one, I'll be happy to digress on one of my favorite harping points...unscrupulous lawyers.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Really? Would you mind filling me in on what the suit was over? I've seen the plaintiff's name floated around a few times...never in a very positive light. I got the impression he was some kind of aviation attorney?

If it's a good one, I'll be happy to digress on one of my favorite harping points...unscrupulous lawyers.
Click to expand...

http://www.overlawyered.com/archives/02/sept2.html#0916b

David if I recall you are an attorney, right? If so you'll enjoy that site ;)
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
If it's a good one, I'll be happy to digress on one of my favorite harping points...unscrupulous lawyers.
Click to expand...
Where do you find one of those??? :dunno:

When I make a delivery, I sometimes see a heading with a long set of names but may not know what kind of firm it is. Often, it can be for CPAs, architects, engineers or other noble professions. Sometimes, as the recipient signs, I'll ask what kind of firm they are. When they respond with "attorney" I'll reply with, "Oh, I was thinking y'all were a legitimate business."

:goofy:
 
It was my understanding that AvWeb had a BBS board not all that dissimilar to the likes of this one. Very likely not the same software but the idea was that pilots could discuss stuff. I never was on that one but I think it ran pretty open loop form what I have learned, in other words not a lot of supervision.

An Attorney working on a case involving some liability issue won his argument and that is to say he extracted money from aviation for his client . There were those who felt that justice had not been served and commented on Mr. Wolk genetic makeup and his parentage among other not pleasant things. In other words they got way out of line.

Mr. Wolk filed suit against AvWeb as the boards sponsor and three individuals that had called him names. One of those is still an active poster on the another board but not here. The suit was eventually settled, AvWeb discontinued their web board and that is all I know for sure.
 
AvWeb took a pretty aggressive stand early on; asked subscribers to send in contributions and bowed up. Unfortunately, posters on the board kept making personal attacks against Mr. Wolk. I watched it happen; couldn't believe what some posters were saying. Mr. Wolk named some of those posters in that action. Their defiant rants about Constitutional rights being abridged; slowed down to a trickle.

It took me over $50,000 to get to the court house steps in one case, not to mention time and effort spent doing research, preparing the attorneys with our side of things and giving them info. Your business turns from whatever you do to one of being a litigant. The other corp. in this case hired a big local firm that filed all sorts of discovery motions; had our officers in depositions, etc. This can drag out over months and maybe even years in big cases.

Usually, one side or the other gets tired of it and some agreement is reached. I don't fault AvWeb for anything in the way of settling; I do fault them for not moderating what some of their posters were saying. It was a free-for-all for awhile.

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
It took me over $50,000 to get to the court house steps in one case, not to mention time and effort spent doing research, preparing the attorneys with our side of things and giving them info. Your business turns from whatever you do to one of being a litigant. The other corp. in this case hired a big local firm that filed all sorts of discovery motions; had our officers in depositions, etc. This can drag out over months and maybe even years in big cases.
Click to expand...

Dave,

As I'm sure you're now aware, that's a tactic that larger businesses/firms like to employ. Firms with a bunch of attorneys can do it because they have the numbers to generate a whole bunch of paperwork/motions to reply to. Large businesses can do it because they have the funds to pay said attorneys to do it.

So what happens is, if you run a small business and the other side knows that you don't have access to the hundreds of thousands of dollars that it does, they will swamp with you discovery and motions. Lawyers do it because they can tell the ethics board, "Hey, I'm only zealously representing my clients, and I believe this will help win the case on its merits." The businesses can get away with it because they have the bucks to do it.

Anyway, the end result is that it can be a war of attrition - if the defendant is a small business, it likely does not have the funds to deal with the volume of court paper coming through and is forced to an early settlement.

Thanks for the synopses and links, I'll take a look at them this evening.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Anyway, the end result is that it can be a war of attrition - if the defendant is a small business, it likely does not have the funds to deal with the volume of court paper coming through and is forced to an early settlement.
Click to expand...

Hence, why some lawyers can be scumbags. Of course the client may be prodding them to do this, too. It's not "who is right" it's "who has the most time, money and resources".
 
woodstock said:
Hence, why some lawyers can be scumbags. Of course the client may be prodding them to do this, too. It's not "who is right" it's "who has the most time, money and resources".
Click to expand...

That's right.

I know that I've been very hard on lawyers in most, if not all, of my other posts (see certain threads on the AOPA boards). Still, I should point out that most lawyers, such as those engaged in transactional things like contracts, deeds, wills, etc. (as an example) will never get mixed up in litigation at all and are therefore exempt from observations like this.

Still more lawyers who are involved in litigation are completely honest and play both by the rules and play fair (yes, you can not play fair and not break the rules).

But, there are a lot of unscrupulous ones out there, probably more than most people know. It is a bell curve, but it is an imperfect bell curve.... I've seen more than a few of them in the last few months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top