RSS
Match.com Says It Never Had Business Relations With That Woman
from the the-affidavit-says-so dept
Last week we wrote about a couple of lawsuits alleging questionable activities on the part of two dating sites. Match.com was accused of sending people on dates specifically to try to keep others from canceling their memberships and Yahoo was accused of stuffing its dater profiles to make it look like there were more people on the service. Match.com has now fired back and said that the charges are baseless and point to a sworn statement from the woman accused of being the fake date saying that that she was never an employee of Match.com and she was never paid to go on any dates by the company. At this point, who knows who's telling the truth, but it would be interesting to hear what made the guy who filed the original lawsuit think this particular woman was only dating him on behalf of the company. What's a little odd (though, perhaps understandable) about Match.com's retort, however, is that they never come out and say from their side that she didn't do things on behalf of the company -- they specifically say her statement says she never worked for the company. It has the wording of someone trying to step around something -- though, that might just be because that's what the lawyers told them to do.
13 Comments | Leave a Comment..
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
relations
Heh.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
most likely...
Having used their service I can say that there are profiles up that are too good to be true - and they always are. Even when they send out winks or emails that contain absolutely no reference to anything in your profile. A few weeks using the service for real will enable you to spot the fake winks/emails pretty quickly.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Truth
..which is all well and good and everything, however a sworn statement is not the same as an official swearing of oath in a court of law, which is more unlikely to be broken.
If the plaintiffs have sufficient evidence to prove their case, then the statements will likely be ignored and thrown out. If there's not enough evidence, then the company has nothing to worry about.
The court will eventually discover the truth of the matter.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
Of course, I guess it's wrong for businesses to profit off of "love" as they do on Valentine's Day as well...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I guess maybe match.com has gone downhill...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I guess maybe match.com has gone downhill...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Too simple
Now Match is saying that they've gotten the employee to sign an avidavit that she was never and employee. Yeah right.
Isn't that too easy. If anybody brings up an allegation against a giant like Match that seriously damages its reputation, do you really believe that all Match would do would be to get the person to sign an avidavit? No way, it'd be more like suing the pants off that woman.
The case of her signing an avidavit just means she's been bribed with a few millions to keep here quiet. Scams will never end. Support the free sites: oasisoflove.com and end the greed.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Come on....what do you think of that!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Dubious
love4ubug and nirvanarelief
I think match.com creates fake profiles to inflate the number of users.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: watch.com
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: watch.com
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: watch.com
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment