Buyer Sues eBay For Alleged Online Slander
from the get-over-it dept
Okay, let's try this one more time for the slow people... If you are providing an internet service that lets anyone comment on things, then those comments are the responsibility of the people who wrote them, and not the company providing the online site. Some guy is suing eBay for slander because someone gave him bad feedback over an auction. The guy who is suing is a lawyer (big surprise there) and has some odd things in the lawsuit. First, he's suing both eBay and the guy who made the negative comments, though he's asking for $2.5 million from eBay and only $100,000 from the guy. Next, he seems to claim that because he told eBay to remove the comments, and they refused, they somehow broke the law. But, his description of what law they broke is that they were "arrogant". I had no idea that arrogance was illegal these days. Furthermore, in the lawsuit he says eBay should be forced to filter the following words from their feedback site: "fraud, liar, cheater, scam artist, con man." Finally, in the most bizarre part of the lawsuit, he says that anyone selling anything on eBay should be required to register their screen names with the state of California as fictitious business names (a standard requirement for anyone acting as a business under a name other than their own), and that eBay be forced to collect state sales tax. What this has to do with the actual case is anybody's guess.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
I'm suing techdirt
For writing a negative opinion of my lawsuit against Ebay!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Subject Given
Ebay should, imo, do something about people leaving false negatives (if at all possible) It's not uncommon for people who are rorting Ebay to leave false negatives just to pre-empt the negative they know they will receive (and then say any subsequent negative is "revenge")
It's a curious and sometimes mystifying system. In any case, their system of leaving negatives/positives doesn't really work. Even honest sellers/buyers are often too scared to leave ANY negatives, because they know they are bound to get one in return.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: I'm suing techdirt
since when is an opinion illegal? you must be high
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: I'm suing techdirt
Opinion is illegal when it is considered slander. Welcome to America.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: I'm suing techdirt
It's illegal when some bozo lies about my character and broadcasts the lie on the internet -that's when it should be stopped!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: I'm suing techdirt by love trux
It is not slander, but libel which is written defamation of character, I think. It is illegal to state false facts such as "seller had someone bid up this item so i am not paying for it". I had that happen to me and had no recourse. The second place bidder was probably scared away by the feedback I received from the buyer and did not take me up on the second chance offer. I ended up relisting it, but got about $120 less than the original auction. They say it is a binding contract, but you can't do anything to the bidder unless you go to their state and file a lawsuit.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Ebayer sues Ebay for alledge online slander
Yes well technically EBay has broken the law for not removing the liable's statement on their site. Internet providers can be held liable, and owners of chat rooms, and boards, such as message boards and such can take the rap if they allow liablious statemsnts to appear on their site because once it's published can be accessed from all over the world!
The EBayer who made the liabelous statement is at fault directly for making the statement, and publishing it on the EBay feedback. While free speach is protected in this country no person has the right to go beyond an opinion and make absolute charges such as "fraud, liar, cheater, scam artist, con man, which is a criminal matter.
Especially if that person is a lawyer and his reputation is at state as a lawyer for such an outburst of discriptives.
Everyone in this country is treated innocent until proven guitly in a court of law. In this case there was no trial to back up this EBayer's statement. If the EBayer who is being sued by this lawyer picks up a case from the Web that shows the lawyer was convicted for fraud, then the statement made on EBay would be true and not liabelous. However, this is hardly ever the case now is it? No one can be a Judge, Jury, and executioner all in one. Therefore whoever stated such a thing stated it to a lawyer and, that lawyer believe me knows what he's talking about!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment