Infomercialscams.com owner harrased by an attorney from the Dozier Law Firm
Here's an example of a company and law firm of trying to suppress free speech by using outlandish claims and a variety of threats.
If you live in Direct Buy's market, you've seen their infomercials on your local television station. Direct Buy claims you can buy direct from the manufacture at below wholesale prices. The only catch is you have to have sign up for one of their plans (sounds similar to Ameriprise) . From the infomercialscams.com web site, the cost to do this will run you around 6,000 dollars for 2-3 years. Anyhow, the informercialscams.com web site has 18 pages of negative comments on Direct Buy that Direct Buy didn't appreciate. Instead of trying to improve their business (sounds similar to Ameriprise), Direct Buy has decided to hire a law firm to intimidate the site's owner into shutting down the site or removing Direct Buy's negative comments.
The name of the law firm Direct Buy hired is Dozier Internet Law. The lawyer, Donald Morris, for this law firm proceeded to send infomercialscams.com web site a cease and desist letter threating the owner with a lawsuit but the real kicker here is he even threatened to sue the owner in Canada since Direct Buy has operations in Canada. Moreover, he threatened the owner if he posted the cease and desist letter that he'd be liable for more legal action since the letter was supposedly copyrighted.
Luckily, Paul Levy from Public Citizen is involved in the case and he sent a response to the cease and desist letter. Donald Morris then sent a threating letter to Paul Levy and Mr. Morris even posted the letter on his website. From reading his response, he and his client have received some type of retaliation by the internet community. As a result of the Streisand Effect the firm has been receiving, the managing partner of the law firm, John Dozier, tried to defend his firm's actions on another blog. On this blog, he states that a court in the United Kingdom upheld that a letter sent in a similar manner was found to have copyright protections. One minor issue with his argument; this isn't the UK. I also found a court ruling in Zimbabwe that said firms this stupid should have their law licenses revoked ;) .
You can read more comments on the blog that discusses this story in greater detail.
If you live in Direct Buy's market, you've seen their infomercials on your local television station. Direct Buy claims you can buy direct from the manufacture at below wholesale prices. The only catch is you have to have sign up for one of their plans (sounds similar to Ameriprise) . From the infomercialscams.com web site, the cost to do this will run you around 6,000 dollars for 2-3 years. Anyhow, the informercialscams.com web site has 18 pages of negative comments on Direct Buy that Direct Buy didn't appreciate. Instead of trying to improve their business (sounds similar to Ameriprise), Direct Buy has decided to hire a law firm to intimidate the site's owner into shutting down the site or removing Direct Buy's negative comments.
The name of the law firm Direct Buy hired is Dozier Internet Law. The lawyer, Donald Morris, for this law firm proceeded to send infomercialscams.com web site a cease and desist letter threating the owner with a lawsuit but the real kicker here is he even threatened to sue the owner in Canada since Direct Buy has operations in Canada. Moreover, he threatened the owner if he posted the cease and desist letter that he'd be liable for more legal action since the letter was supposedly copyrighted.
Luckily, Paul Levy from Public Citizen is involved in the case and he sent a response to the cease and desist letter. Donald Morris then sent a threating letter to Paul Levy and Mr. Morris even posted the letter on his website. From reading his response, he and his client have received some type of retaliation by the internet community. As a result of the Streisand Effect the firm has been receiving, the managing partner of the law firm, John Dozier, tried to defend his firm's actions on another blog. On this blog, he states that a court in the United Kingdom upheld that a letter sent in a similar manner was found to have copyright protections. One minor issue with his argument; this isn't the UK. I also found a court ruling in Zimbabwe that said firms this stupid should have their law licenses revoked ;) .
You can read more comments on the blog that discusses this story in greater detail.
posted by amexsux at 12:31 PM
1 comments
