Video Professor Sues Anonymous Critics
from the buy-my-product dept
If you watch enough TV, you've probably come across the commercials for "the video professor" who offers DVD videos teaching you how to do things like use your computer. The commercials involve an appeal from the CEO and founder of the company to "buy my product" and promote how you can get a trial for "free!" However, if you look around online, you find many, many complaints that the company ended up charging people money for the supposedly "free" products. What is actually happening is that when you sign up for the "free" trial, you're actually signing up for a subscription to receive other training videos periodically. The problem is that many people don't realize this -- and claim that they were mislead (in many ways, this is similar to the Amazon Prime mess that still hasn't been cleared up. Whether or not the company clearly explains to buyers what they're signing up for is open to debate.
However, with such widespread criticism for its practices online, it isn't surprising that the company is concerned. Of course, rather than addressing those criticisms, instead the company has decided to sue. Greg Beck writes in to point out that the company (which tells people to look for reviews online) has sued 100 anonymous critics of the company claiming trademark violations and defamation. Lots of companies seem to think negative reviews constitute a trademark violation, but a review is a perfectly legitimate use of a trademark. Defamation depends specifically on what the reviewers said, so it's difficult to judge that aspect of the lawsuits. However, to tell people to look for reviews online, and then go out and sue a bunch of folks who negatively reviewed your product seems like highly questionable activity.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
by no on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 8:30am
Amazon Prime is AWESOME. I can't even begin to imagine how much money I've saved in the last year alone by using their free two day shipping or $2-$4 overnight shipping. One of the best deals on the internet.
The VIdeo Professor... however... is a fucking idiot.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Joel Coehoorn on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 8:31am
I remember video professor from way back when Windows 95 came out. It seemed like the products were teaching extremely basic concepts, leading me to wonder that unless they've updated their topics considerably this whole thing is really moot; if you know how to look for reviews online, do you really need video professor?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Sharp, pointy stick. by The infamous Joe on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 8:52am
The point isn't that they teach things every 8 year old knows or that they downplay the fact that you sign up for a subscription and you receive random charges and random "MS Paint and you" CDs.. it's that the good Professor's action against negative criticism is, not to refute the claims, but instead to sue anonymous people who had a negative experience to relate to the general public about his product. I always get a red flag warning when I am bombarded with the word "free", and it never ceases to amaze me how many people actually believe that anything is still free these days.
In any event, now a lot more people are going to have negative things to say about the Professor, as well as hear about the negative reviews.
Maybe someone should sell a CD to him entitled "The Streisand Effect: Pros and Cons" to him. :)
..I, not being a lawyer, have to wonder if suing someone ever has a good outcome... maybe we should just do away with it altogether.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sharp, pointy stick. by Matt on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 8:58am
ROFL!
I swear I am going to make a CD like that and sell it to large corporations! That could be so much fun. I could use barbara streisand footage and maybe even have someone try to sue me for copyright or trademark violation in the process! This could be a lot of fun lol....definitely beyond youtube worthy...and of course, sell it in youtube but laugh as corporations buy a CD of it.
ohhhh man, please, anyone want to help with this project find me via my blog usagemayvary.blogspot.com
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:05am
Ha one summer I needed a job, my regular summer employer had hired somone else for my spot, and the local telemarketing place was hiring...Well i went with and decided I can do telemarketing.
The product I was selling was the Video Professor. I can tell you that the fact that it was a subscription was never deliberately concealed; however the offer was presented in such a way that you could easily end up with a subscription that you didn't want.
Eventually I went to my boss and told him that I wasn't totally comfortable with the way that the video professor offer was being presented to people. Well long story short, I was told that I didn't believe in the product (this was right after graduation from PSU with an MIS degree so I didn't believe in it), and I was moved to another section within the company. Then I quit two weeks later when I got a real job.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:12am
Video Professor seems to use the same approach as those companies offering your 'free credit report'. If you aren't careful you end up with a subscription for worthless credit report monitoring.
As The infamous Joe correctly points out - Nothing is 'Free'
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:14am
LOL, so they are suing Anonymous Critics of their product? Post the link so we can all join in on the fun!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Put up or shup up by Danny on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:17am
I feel about as sorry for this guy as I do for resturaunt owners who try to ban food critics and sue the ones that give them bad marks. Which is not sorry at all. Reviewing a product is not a violation of trademark because if it was then even the people that wrote good reviews would get sued too. Funny thing is we don't see that happening. And if I'm not mistaken isn't one of the main conditions of defamation proving that the offending party said things that they knew were false?
So unless the people that reviewed the product did not unknowingly sign up for future products...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Dvorak on Video Professor by Jim on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:26am
John C. Dvorak was discussing Video Professor on a TWiT podcast sometime this past year. According to him, the way this dude makes his money is not through the sale of the product or not necessarily from hooking suckers into subscriptions, but from the sale of mailing lists which is the real focus of their business plan. Notice they make no promise that your contact information won't be sold.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Disbar the attorneys by Neal on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:31am
You know, one thing that ALWAYS strikes me when I see lawsuits like this is that there are attorneys behind them. Sure, Joe Moron might not understand that there's no case here (or might not want to accept it), but there shouldn't be an attorney in the US that doesn't know better BEFORE they're even out of law school. I personally think that any attorney that fails to refuse such a case (or any other of their ilk) should be immediately face penalties from fines, suspension of their law license, to permanent disbarment.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:32am
Aren't you guys afraid you'll get sued for this story?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Amazon Prime by Angry Amazon Customer on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:41am
Why have you charged my credit card $79? I demand an immediate refund!
;-)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re#10, #4 by Killer_Tofu on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:48am
#10, I agree. That would be neat and help solve the sue happy problem America faces today.
#4, maybe since you would use her footage, you could convince Streisand herself to sue you, only making it that much more popular and awesome! You CD/DVD would be proving itself right!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Disbar the attorneys by Sean on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:49am
why give penilies when you can just sue them
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: AC #11 by CharlieHorse on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 9:50am
LOL!
I agree ... So, in order to avoid possible legal repercussions, I will refrain from commenting on the complete absurdity of using frivolous lawsuits that waste everyone's time and money in pursuit of the ludicrous goal of stopping anonymous comments on the internet about your crappy product.
there - see, I didn't make a statement. I stated very clearly that I wasn't making a statement.
Besides - Neal brings up a good point - there needs to be some sort of serious pain felt by attorneys who engage in these sorts of asinine lawsuits. example: S-C-O. In cases like these, I feel that the lawyers (and/or law firms) themselves should be held liable along with the company they represent should they lose the case. That would probably go a long way towards making these ambulance chasers think twice before embarking on a case like this one.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Jimbo on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 10:31am
Darn, I was thinking about ordering their "How to eBay" course...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Can't even update the commercial by Ragaboo on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 10:37am
My favorite part of the Video Professor commercials is that the discs all say Windows ME. Yeah, they're with the times all right...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sharp, pointy stick. by Name on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 10:56am
>Maybe someone should sell a CD to him entitled "The Streisand Effect: Pros and Cons" to him. :)
LOL
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I'll countersue by Old Guy on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 10:57am
And I don't even need a lawyer because... I have http://www2.cali.org/ So I can find out all about the law for FREE!!!!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 11:03am
You are all gonna get sued for these comments! :P
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I am suing all posters by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 11:51am
I am opening a suit to all posters who used a word with three letters that starts with T. I can't say it, it is highly offensive to me. Out of court settlements will be considered for th...a sum equal to one gabillion dollors ..ere dollars..yeah.. givit to me now..
Respect my authoritah!!
Hippies
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Class action by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 11:53am
Just bring a class action on behalf of 100k anonymous customers. :-)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor by Geoge W. on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 12:03pm
Video Professor is a flaming faggot and a pathetic loozer!! :)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 12:13pm
Video Professor Blows Dead Horses!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 12:16pm
The standard to win that kind of lawsuit is pretty high. I don't know who their attorneys are, just hope I don't hire one of them.
OTOH, frivolous lawsuits do impose costs on the victim. Even though Video Professor will probably have to pay their legal costs, it will still eat up the victims' time, perhaps serving as a warning to others wanting to tell their stories.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: AC #11 by Stephen Samuel on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 12:20pm
Actually, there is some hope that BSF (the lawyers) could be held liable for SCO"s legal shenanigans -- They took part of their payment in stock and an option to get a percentage if there was a buyout (presumably as a result of the suit).
If the world is lucky, this could be taken as collusion.in a frivolous lawsuit. (IANAL, so I'm not sure as to exactly how this would be framed)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: AC #11 by Layton on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 12:22pm
In Britain, the loser of the civil case has to pay all attorney fees. As you can imagine, they have alot less frivolous law suits. I would wholly agree with that policy being implemented here in the US.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
slapp by Stephen Samuel on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 12:32pm
Hopefully some of the 'vicims' of live in states with anti-SLAPP rules (eg California). If they can get their case moved to such a state, then they can apply under the SLAPP laws to sanction these guys
(( slapp = Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Partitpation ))
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Lawyers by dadz on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 1:05pm
Not sure but there must be a way to determine who the sue happy lawyers are and post that info for all to use as they see fit...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Try my product... by Anonymous on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 1:24pm
Subject to be spoken in George Bush tone and accent.
They make their money from the "Shipping and Handling" charges. It doesn't cost anywhere near that much to mail a CD-ROM. They just overcharge and take the difference.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Wow! Clever move! by jp on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 1:47pm
Now people will start to buy those excellent products. A company that feels the necessity to do this really must be doing it right.
Genius!
I alone have told about two dozen people about that amazing company and their wonderful products. Please do the same and help spread the word about what a wonderful company this is.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 2:55pm
You'll all be receiving papers shortly.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Yes, SLAPP them back by Avatar28 on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 4:41pm
Hopefully Stephen is right. A few anti-slapp countersuits would probably teach them a nice lesson. Then again, maybe this is research for their new video, The Video Professor's Guide to SLAPP lawsuits.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor by where's the common sense? on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 5:48pm
What am I missing? How is it trademark infringement to provide a testamonial of your own experiences with a company, good or bad? If I am not trying to profit from their name either way, how can it be trademark infringement? To me, if a judge even agrees to hear this case, let alone decide in the favor of the Video Prof, then it is really an infringement on our freedom of speech.
This is a much more scary thing than whether or not I was a savvy or naive buyer.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"misled" by ndt on Sep 24th, 2007 @ 6:09pm
It's spelled "misled".
Also, he says "try my product", not "buy my product", the implication being that you can try it with no obligation.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 25th, 2007 @ 12:01am
sounds like the girls gone wild scam
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
The Video Professor by Jessie Lee on Sep 25th, 2007 @ 12:05am
FUCK THE VIDEO PROFESSOR!!!!! WHAT AN ASHOLE. I'm gping to make it a REAL point to tell my firends to tell their friends about this money hongerer...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor Sucks by Allen Harkleroad on Sep 25th, 2007 @ 12:28am
A good many years ago (about 8yrs) before my wife and I met and got married, Video Professor pulled the monthly charge on my wife. After I came into the picture I took care of it for her, of course she lost most of the money Video Professor had been charging her, but the credit card charges stopped. If it is on your credit card dispute it, you didn't knowingly give them permission to charge your card, despite what they think, dispute it and tell the Card Company you want ALL of the money back that they took. If Video Professor gets enough charge backs their card processor may drop them, if nothing else the chargebacks will get very expensive (Chargebacks costs a lot more than what was actually charged, in some cases a lot more). It is a losing proposition for Video Professor to take the litigation route, that and they will end up becoming the 'joke' of the Internet.
I personally think Video Professor is nothing more than scammers selling junk.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by Phil on Sep 25th, 2007 @ 4:48am
That's it, you're getting sued! ;)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 25th, 2007 @ 6:10am
you suck '-)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor Lack-Luster. (100% SHAT) by Charles on Sep 25th, 2007 @ 7:23am
I have seen a CD of this series... and its definately not for everyone. Come to think of it.... I don't think I would recommend this product to ANYONE. Not even the most computer il-idiot people it targets. The Video Professor training is dry and quite awful. But more to the point their business practices are retarded. That is where they get their SHAT raiting from. Taking advantage of people that are already on the computer slow side... ~_~.
Opps did I say something bad about the Video Professor? Damn... add me to the list of Defendants.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by radfaraf on Sep 25th, 2007 @ 9:17am
Video professor would occasionally give 'free' medical software with some of their CDs and then send people to our company for technical support. However, these CDs were not published by either our company or Video professor so it was very frustrating explaining this to the callers who usually were computer noobs.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Sep 25th, 2007 @ 4:28pm
is this where I sign up for the FREE lessons on how to use Amazon?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Disbar the attorneys by Peggy on Sep 29th, 2007 @ 7:57am
I wholeheartedly agree!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor's Litigation! by Dan Wilson on Sep 29th, 2007 @ 1:52pm
This issue is important to consumers! This is a draconian attack on the very foundation of the First Amendment Speech. An entity or a person with 'deep' pockets believes he can suppress Free Speech through financial intimidation is no different than a foreign junta or a dictatorial regime arresting their opponents for their expression of free speech through military or police action.
Can you imagine where this would lead? Let's warp this ahead in time and say that Video Professor is successful in his suit against the defendants in this case. According to your article, he promises to take this all the way up to the Supreme Court. Would this not have a chilling effect on every negative review of a product, movie, politician, corporate business practice, restaurant, movie etc.? Could not this open the legal floodgates for anyone who has received a negative review claiming the same cause for libel and defamation? I would lead you to another similar celebrated case being fought against a book review at various places on the web.
http://richarddawkins.net/article,1546,PZ-Myers-sued-for-a-negative-review-in-a-blog-post,Bo ing-Boing or
Here
http://www.boingboing.net/2007/08/20/writer-sued-for-a-ne.html.
Would this not suppress every critic out there or limit their comments in a fog of possible litigation?
The bottom line is this. Can a person or a corporate entity who has unlimited financial and legal resources be able to use the judicial system to suppress the Free Speech of outspoken critics who he KNOWS does not have access to those same resources? Litigation in the court system is expensive.
A lawyer can bury the other side in paperwork with legal tactics and strategies using depositions, interrogatories, subpoenas, delays, appeals etc. There is no way that the average consumer has the economic resources to legally fight such a strategy and they knows this. So in effect, they are able silence their critics by De Facto litigation. However, the chilling aftermath of all this is a suppression of the basic First Amendment Rights.
In the W. R.Grace & Co in the Woburn case and in Libby, Montana, http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/grace03.shtml. Didn't Jan Schlichtmann's Law Firm end up in bankruptcy?
These cases do not merit the free speech dicussion above but only shows how corporations and individuals can use the legal system to advance or protect their business practices from consumers.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sharp, pointy stick. by vpsucks on Sep 30th, 2007 @ 2:26pm
Careful VP might sue you!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Put up or shup up by Anonymous Coward on Sep 30th, 2007 @ 2:28pm
What Ever happened to freedom of speech?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor Lawsuit by Max Powers on Oct 1st, 2007 @ 7:57pm
Any company that has hundreds to thousands of complaints about them must be doing something wrong. I'm waiting to see the outcome of this case but will continue to warn consumers of Video Professor and other companies that market their products in misleading ways.
Thanks to the Internet and sites like this and mine that continue to expose these crooks to warn and inform consumers.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I'm one of the guys being sued by Andrew on Oct 18th, 2007 @ 10:00am
YOU HAVE BEEN SUED BY VIDEO PROFESSOR.
THIS IS A NOTICE FROM INFOMERICIALSCAMS.COM ABOUT YOUR RIGHTS.
Why am I getting this notice?
You are getting this notice because you are one of 100 people (known as 'John Does') who are being sued by Video Professor in connection with an anonymous posting that you made on the infomercialscams.com website. The case is known as Video Professor v. John Doe 1-100, Civil Action No. 07-cv-01726-WYD-CBS, and is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado (Denver).
Will my identity be revealed?
Video Professor is asking the court to order infomercialscams.com to reveal identifying information about you, including the name and email address that you provided when you registered to post. This information may also include the 'IP number' that you used when posting; this number can be used to identify your Internet Service Provider which may have further identifying information about you. Infomercialscams.com may be forced to reveal such identifying information that it has, unless a motion is filed on your behalf in federal court to block such disclosure. The rest of this message provides you with information about the reasons that Video Professor has given for demanding this information, and what you can do to respond to Video Professor's demand.
What is Video Professor claiming?
Video Professor claims that the 100 John Does, including you, are engaged in false advertising in violation of federal law and defamation in violation of Colorado law, and also alleges several other claims under Colorado law.
What specific statements is Video Professor's lawsuit about?
In response to a demand by our attorneys, citing your First Amendment right to anonymous free speech, Video Professor has specified the following message from you that was posted on the infomercialscams.com web site on 8/10/2007 allegedly contain false and defamatory statements. The underlined words are the specific statements that Video Professor claims are false:
Video Professor has provided the attached affidavit from one of its officials, Bettye Harrison, as well as a chart that reveals the following basis for its claim that the underlined words are false:
VPI does not make unauthorized charges to customer credit card accounts. This is specifically verifyable because VPI records and archives each and every one of its telephone purchase transactions. If the identity of the poster is provided, the recording will reflect that the charges were authorized by this customer or that no such transaction ever occurred.
2. Video Professor provides a telephone number in each package shipped. When calling Video Professor Customer Service, the customer is also advised of the option of e-mailing their request or faxing their request.
What do I need to do to stop my identity from being revealed? Do I need my own lawyer?
If you want to prevent the disclosure of your identifying information, you may wish to obtain your own attorney to file a motion to block disclosure on your behalf. That motion can be filed in federal court EITHER in Nevada OR in Colorado (your attorney will decide). So long as you or your attorney notifies us by October 31 that a motion to quash has been filed on your behalf, we will object to disclosure until that motion has been decided.
If I can't get my own lawyer, will your lawyers help me?
Our lawyers are reviewing the materials supplied by Video Professor to decide whether, in their opinion, Video Professor has shown enough evidence to be able to learn your identity. If they conclude that Video Professor has NOT shown enough, they will file papers making that argument with the Court unless Video Professor improves its showing.
However, you should not count on our lawyers filing on your behalf, or on their succeeding in such an argument. The only way to be certain that a motion to block disclosure is filed on your behalf, assuming that such a motion is justified, is to get your own lawyer to file it for you.
Our lawyers are willing to consider representing individual posters on our web site. Their names and contact information are listed below. The Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco is also willing to consider such representation. You may call EFF's intake coordinator, Eva Galperin, at 415-436-9333, extension 111. Another resource to consult is the web site http://www.subpoenadefense.org/legal.htm. The American Civil Liberties Union is willing to provide information about opposing subpoenas to identify anonymous Internet speakers. For information, contact Christina Juhasz-Wood at cjuhasz-wood@aclu.org or 212 549-2640.
Who are our lawyers?
The lawyers representing infomercialscams.com are:
Paul Alan Levy
Deepak Gupta
Public Citizen Litigation Group
1600 - 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009
(202) 588-1000
FAX: 202-588-7795
litigation@citizen.org
Who are Video Professor's lawyers?
The main lawyer representing Video Professor is:
Gregory H. Smith, Esquire
Fairfield and Woods, P.C.
Wells Fargo Center, Suite 2400
1700 Lincoln St.
Denver, Colorado 80203-4524
303-894-4459
FAX: 303-830-1033
ghsmith@fwlaw.com
The entire complaint filed by Video Professor, and the entire chart of allegedly defamatory posts from infomercialscams.com, can be accessed at http://www.infomercialscams.com/vptable.htm
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor Litigation by Louis Cross on Oct 23rd, 2007 @ 11:50am
I just read an article on Google about a law firm in California that is going after Video Professor. They are even offering to represent the people who are being sued. Pretty interesting. Check out www.vplitigation.com. I didn't keep the url for the article, but if you use Google news you can find it I tihnk.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor Litigation by Louis Cross on Oct 24th, 2007 @ 12:46pm
So The Video Professor (the late-night infomerical "Try my product" dude, sued various bloggers and websites that were critical of their products and more importantly business practices.
Its nuts. Its unamerican. It also is apparently a lousy lawsuit.
The nonprofit law firm Public Citizen sent them this letter, and posted on their website. http://www.citizen.org/documents/videoprofletter.pdf
It is killer.
Separately, I sawan article that ran on google news about a law firm going after Video Professor http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20071023006 473&newsLang=en
I guess they are filing a class action and offered to represent the people VP is going after for free. Check out www.vplitigation.com Pretty interesting.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor's by Dont Wanna Give My NameYou Might Sue Me on Nov 1st, 2007 @ 10:07pm
Video Professor is acting like these 100 individuals are going to bankrupt them. I sure haven't see where their commercial has been pulled off the air. The fact is these people had negative experiences with the product/company AND the representatives they had to deal with. Maybe this is another way for them to make more money. I don't know.
What if one of those 100 people is on disability meaning NO INCOME - they can't "hire" an attorney to help them against a corporation who has unlimited financial reserves and a lawyer on retainer for every negative word said about them.
Personally I hope VP is told they need to just suck it up.
Besides, I always thought a little criticism was good for a business - It lets them know where things are working or not so they can improve.
What's the point of having the Freedom of Speech if any corporation or company who gets their feelings hurt can demand the persnal information of an individual who wants to be anonymous just so they can sue them over a little negative feed back about their product?
Isn't that how it was with Hitler and others like him who couldn't handle criticism? Oh wait, they just had you killed. This is the day and age of suing anybody for whatever turns you on.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Sue Me. I Dare You. on Nov 14th, 2007 @ 4:02am
Some people like the video professor are just so greedy they want to make even more money off suing their customers. it definitely doesn't help sell their product if they say "if you don't like our product, we'll sue you!"
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
America is the land of sue by BBB on Dec 11th, 2007 @ 10:29pm
Video Professor is worried that the users on infomercialscams.com are their competitor trying to mislead customers with negative comments. If any of the users should turn out to be true, VP is financially set for life. With this in mind, who could not afford to lose. Even if VP lose the case and lost some money, it has done two or more thing free. 1) free advertising thru publicity, whether bad or good. 2) discover its core failure. 3) discover what customer wants and hate.
Ultimately, everyone's gonna hate VP whether they win or not. If they win the case, they probably won't care if sale decline. Actually, sale could depend on whether if the change their business practice and hidden fee (speaking of hidden fee, do not buy Red Excerciser with its $14.99 Free Trail thru your TV).
Why VP decide to sue could be 1) They're good image is turning into Lindsay Lohan because of the Internet. 2) Customers are declining. 3) They're not making any money like they use to because of the free information on the Internet. 4) read first paragraph. 5) IT'S EASIER TO MAKE MONEY SUING PEOPLE THAN SELLING CD. 6) THE COST OF FIGHTING THIS LAWSUIT OVERWEIGHT THE COST OF PRODUCTION AND ADVERTISING TO MAKE THE CD.
Conspiracy theory: $6.99 to send a CD in a paper envelope only cost $1.39, this practice is very similar to sellers found on Ebay. Of course, VP could say $6.99 covers handling, labor cost, material, and all. But no one in their business mind would charge only $7 to breakeven. Since it only cost around $1.39 to ship, .05 cent for the paper envelope, .30 cent for the CD, and .10 cents for the printing. VP should profit $5 for anyone that accepts the free trail. So if 10,000 people try the free trail, VP already make $50,000 on shipping. Not to mention the information it could sell from these suckers. It also says it 8 million people had already tried. How many actually satisfy or stay with the program? It probably a inflated figure like AOL subscriber. Hey you know, this is not a bad idea for VP to try AOL's aggressive method of sending everyone in America a free CD and claim on its accounting as a sale.
How I love America, if you don't make money, you sue them. I have a feeling VP is going to lose this case, make a bad name for itself and eventually go into bankruptcy as if it isn't there already. Who knows.
Ohh, and if VP boy scouts are reading this...tell your boss to make a CD entitled: How to Sue. It's time he move from his Window and graphic learning CD to something like, How to create a websie like MySpace and How to money charging high fee and using free trail. I might be interested in buying these CD's so I can learn to scam.
Just my two cents.
Disclaimer: All materials, contents, texts, languages expressed here are for entertainment purposes. It does not represent the view or opinion of techdirt.com, or its members. Techdirt.com will not disclose any IP to any money hungry company that threathen lawsuit against the freedom of speech. Company that violate this will know the power of free speech and Internet. Have a nice day and try to turn negative comments into a positive view.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous on Jan 7th, 2008 @ 6:14pm
Scary is all I can say. A big company tracking down people to sue them. Wow!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous on Jan 7th, 2008 @ 6:14pm
Scary is all I can say. A big company tracking down people to sue them. Wow!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jan 8th, 2008 @ 3:32pm
Update: according to Infomercialscams.com, the lawsuit has been dropped. I wonder why *sarcasm* :p
This is another pathetic attempt by another failing business that try to rip people off by using the business model implied consent. Anyone business that use this model should be avoided.
Negative comments are meant to revive the business model and customer relationship. I hope Video Professor and other businesses that try to sue John Doe and Jane learn a valuable lesson here. If there's more negative comments than positive, it must mean a) your product/service sucks b) your payment method is too aggressive c) your customer service is terrible and/or d) people are not sastified with the result. Instead of wasting your time on the Internet for these negative comments that can scare your business and try to get rip of them by suing them, improve the product or service so that there's more positive comments on the internet.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor Problems by Calvin on Feb 18th, 2008 @ 5:10am
If the Company has individuals complaining about it's billing practices, shouldn't the Company first address the complaints. It appears that the Video Professor Company instead is suing to shut them up....in essence something similar to a "Slam Suit". I am going to wait on purchasing any Video Professor products until I see how all of this plays out. I do not like Corporate bullying, however I will wait just in fairness. However, if the individuals are wrong.....then their wrong and may to pay of the hip to satisfy the Professor.
Just my 2 cents worth!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Video Professor's Business Practices by Mac on Feb 20th, 2008 @ 6:48pm
Video Professor has a great product, but is in need of real marketing. The product sells like hotcakes through Ebay and Amazon on the second hand market, yet they still find it necessary to advertise using infomercials, manipulating the publics mode of payment, spinning the blame for that manipulation on the very Consumers that could take them public. The Company is 20+ years old but still follow David Letterman on late night TV! They should use their litigation fund to pay for real advertising and marketing infrastructure....not law suits.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment