Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Thread Morons -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DSPetry who wrote (7706)	4/27/1999 1:32:00 AM
From: S. maltophilia	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12810

<<always files>> I must defer to you on this point. I'm not familiar with their litigation history.<G>

To: DSPetry who wrote (7706)	4/27/1999 7:03:00 AM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12810

Dave, I believe Khalil is right on the legal issues. No money changed hands and the Webnode postings were quickly revealed as a prank so fraud is difficult to prove. As far as I am aware the W3 did not have a contract to provide news to Business Wire. As journalists BW is the one that has the responsibility to verify it's sources. The trademark issue? They didn't use the name of Business Wire until after the story was published. Complaining about Bidness Wire is silly. In the context of parody that will be allowable. I'm not a lawyer so a lawyer might disagree. You ask is Business Wire is the habit of filing frivolous lawsuits. I doubt it. But they have been embarrassed by this. It is possible this is a 'Slap' suit. In other words they may suspect they will lose the actual case but the publicity of this lawsuit will serve to frighten others who might consider such an action. 'Slap' suits are not about winning on legal issues, they are about frightening people with less resources. I don't know if this is what Business Wire is doing but 'Slap' suits are not unheard of. regards Henry