Re: 8/14/01 - [BVSN] BroadVision v. Does 1-9, San Mateo Superior Court No. 417698.
BVSN's SLAPP
by: doe9doe9 08/14/01 04:36 pm
Msg: 166350 of 166453
RE: BVSN's SLAPP
Hi,
On July 25, 2001, BVSN filed a lawsuit, BroadVision v.
Does 1-9, San Mateo Superior Court No. 417698. The
suit is directed against nine Does, based on their
posts on this message board. BVSN's complaint is for
breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and
defamation.
BVSN used this lawsuit to get a subpoena issued to
Yahoo!, seeking identifying information about the nine
Does. Today is the date Yahoo is scheduled to respond
to BVSN's subpoena.
I posted the message for which BVSN is suing Doe 9, so
I guess that makes me Doe 9.
Yesterday, my attorney, from the California Anti-SLAPP
Project, filed a special motion to strike the
complaint as a meritless SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit
Against Public Participation), under California's
anti-SLAPP law, Code of Civil Procedure section
425.16. When my motion was filed, that automatically
"stayed" (blocked or froze) all discovery in the case,
including BVSN's subpoena to Yahoo as to all nine
Does.
You might be interested in which nine posters BVSN
sued. It may be you!
These are the defendants in BVSN's complaint and what
they are being sued for:
Doe 1: "bv585broadway", for posts on 6/06/01.
Doe 2: "dr_chen_pehong", for a post on 6/19.
Doe3: "smartinv2001", for post #164317.
Doe4: "bvsmgr", for post #164430, on 7/12/01.
Doe5: "early_wave_layoff", for post #163768 on
7/04/01, and for four other posts in early July.
Doe6: "yosemite_april", for posts on 7/05/01 and
7/06/01.
Doe7: "z_to_me", for posts between 7/05/01 and
7/12/01.
Doe8: "belsenb", for posts between 6/29/01 and 7/06/01.
Doe9: "bv405broadway", for a post on 6/21/01
If you're one of the other Does, and would like to
explore the possibility of cooperation in fighting
against this SLAPP, reply to doe9doe9@yahoo.com.
This lawsuit is an attack on all who use this message
board, except for the BVSN hacks/apologists. The
stock price is down, not because of message board
postings, but because of BVSN's own operational
difficulties, such as the $240 million loss in the
latest quarter. Rather than take responsibility for
the stunning decline in BVSN's fortunes and stock
price, BVSN management seeks to "shoot the
messengers". Even if you are not now named in BVSN's
complaint, you could be in the future if you post
something BVSN doesn't like!
For more information about SLAPPs, visit the webite of
the California Anti-SLAPP Project, www.casp.net.
Doe 9
messages.yahoo.com
=====
Re: BVSN's SLAPP
by: griperight 08/15/01 04:15 am
Msg: 166372 of 166453
ditto the comment fighting them. don't take shit from wealthy "executives". no wonder so many companies in high tech are firing people, bunch of morons are running the companies.
How sickenly, moronic and pathetic is it that BV management has to go after sometimes useful, sometimes ignoramous message board posters?
Question:
1)What does BV expect to accomplish from this, if it's true?
2)are they suing Greenspan next?
3)Who at BV would initiate such a stupid idea of a message board lawsuit?
Posted as a reply to: Msg 166360 by StMaier
messages.yahoo.com
=====
Re: BVSN's SLAPP
by: monterey_tahoe_rome 08/15/01 07:02 am
Msg: 166373 of 166453
The reason why BroadVision is suing those 9 Does is they are telling too much about how BroadVision has been operated and how BroadVision had screwed theirs clients.
Posted as a reply to: Msg 166372 by griperight
messages.yahoo.com
=====
Re: BVSN's SLAPP
by: lobstergazpacho (39/F/I'm from Missouri) 08/15/01 09:44 am
Msg: 166376 of 166453
BV investors OUGHT to be complaining about why BVSN is paying lawyers (to the tune of $200-$300 per hour) to pursue Yahoo chat board posters...what a flagrant waste of money.
Posted as a reply to: Msg 166374 by griperight
messages.yahoo.com |
