Legal Issues of Consumer Sites

Consumers who are "mad as _ell, and not gonna take it anymore!"

[Still Waters]

You know those web sites, typically named www.(fill-in-brandname)s*cks.com?

Well, I was wondering about the legalities involved in such sites. What are the ground rules that must be followed, or the webmaster (or site owner) gets into legal trouble? How far is "too far?"

Anyone know of real cases, in which a webmaster (or site owner) got sued by the brandname company?

I thought this might be an interesting topic. ;)

[mbennie]

I'm pretty sure we still have freedom of speech.

I'm not familiar with the types of sites you mention but it seems that it would be a complete waste of time/energy/resources to try to squelch every Tom/Dick/Harry who had something negative to say.

Spend time building a happy and loyal customer base knowing that you can't please all the people all the time.

[bcolflesh]

Every "sucks" site I can think of has been crushed by the target company in the USA - notably "verizonsucks" a few years back...

Regards,
Brent

[digitalghost]

[google.com...]

[Still Waters]

[2600.com ]

May 8, 2000

We decided it would be a good idea to register verizonsucks.com because, if our experience with past phone companies is any indication, Verizon will in all probability be thought of in this way in the near future. But we didn't move fast enough. Apparently, Verizon realized this was going to happen and they went and had their lawyers register verizonsucks.com themselves! (The logic of owning a site that says your business sucks really escapes us.)

We did the next best thing and registered verizonREALLYsucks.com....

On Friday, a certified letter was sent to 2600 by Bell Atlantic demanding that we turn this domain over to them or face the consequences....

[2600.com ]

Sep 12, 2000

According to news reports, Verizon is no longer pursuing legal action against 2600 due to our registration of verizonreallysucks.com.

In Friday's Washington Post, a Verizon spokesman says that around 200 letters were sent to various holders of domains with "Verizon" in them. These people, according to Verizon, had the domains with the sole intent of selling them.

"It turned out 2600 was the one exception," said Verizon spokesman Larry Plumb. "Once we saw it met the standards of fair use, we decided not to pursue it. We're out to defend our brand against confusion and dilution, not squelch free speech."

Anyone have first-hand experience with these types of sites?
On the company side, or on the site side?

Anyone ever considered creating such a site?
Anyone ever taken action against such a site?

[Still Waters]

mbennie, I totally agree with you. Companies should focus on creating satisfied customers. Then, there wouldn't be any complaints, to start with.

I can't blame consumers who want to (1) vent about legitimate problems and (2) warn other consumers to "watch out" for particular problems. This is an interesting kind of idea, using the web to empower consumers.