Legal fund for Reviewers/Erin?

[CedarX]

There is an interesting parallel here between experienced poker players and newbies. It's kind of the same thing. They don't know what they're doing so you can't figure out what they're doing, either.

I kinda keep an eye on Tekton, not because of I’m interested in their products, but to try to understand what they, and Mr. Alexander, were/are about—just being curious, observing…

The obvious: an ego as large as Utah Great Salt Lake…. They’ll never admit or even understand they were wrong. They’ll continue to develop speakers based on the same pseudo-scientific theories—shady but as flamboyant as their speaker color palette. If they ever publish measurements, it’s going to be a 200 pages patchwork of unintelligible graphs for every speaker, just to prove they can measure more than anybody else.

Any Company/Business with that type of ego = lawsuit risk for the reviewer.

 

[Sal1950]

It would be filtered out at the discovery stage or whatever it is called in The Court of King's Bench. (We have a king now and not a queen as the figurehead.)

Do they still wear those goofy wigs in the courts there?

 

[Doodski]

Do they still wear those goofy wigs in the courts there?

No, I have never seen that but I have seen black gowns over a suit and tie with long white bows tying the neck together. That's reserved for criminal court sometimes.

 

[Doodski]

@Sal1950

https://www.legalattirecanada.com/

Here are the Supreme Court Judges.

 

[SIY]

@Sal1950

https://www.legalattirecanada.com/

Here are the Supreme Court Judges.
View attachment 381700

Let me tell you what I want for Christmas. I've been a good boy, Santa.

 

[Doodski]

Let me tell you what I want for Christmas. I've been a good boy, Santa.

I thought they look like red Smurfs... LoL.

 

[im_gumby]

This just goes away, like most such threats. Can you imagine either side settling or going to trial? The appearance of an NDA (review taken down or changed to the positive) would arguably be more damaging to the company. Alternatively, how can they prove cause-effect damages? An increase in CPI or a bear market is likely to be more impactful. Plus, it will cost them a truck-load of DACs to prosecute (well, maybe a pallet).

However, having been a brick/mortar/online business owner in the past (with absolutely everything on the line) I can absolutely understand how emotions may compell a business owner to want to go for the throat.

Not sure why NDA pops up.
A non disclosure agreement for doing a review? Kinda counter intuitive.

That said, either party could send out a contract that stipulate terms of the review. One that outlines the T&Cs of the review.
( Most people don't need it, but just to be safe, its cheaper to create a standard agreement, than spend money on one threat of a lawsuit. )

I think that it tends to be the marketing droids who do the threatening.
Personally, I think its counter productive. Best way to make the market look at other products and its a competitive market.

 

[pderousse]

Not sure why NDA pops up.
A non disclosure agreement for doing a review? Kinda counter intuitive.

That said, either party could send out a contract that stipulate terms of the review. One that outlines the T&Cs of the review.
( Most people don't need it, but just to be safe, its cheaper to create a standard agreement, than spend money on one threat of a lawsuit. )

I think that it tends to be the marketing droids who do the threatening.
Personally, I think it’s counter productive. Best way to make the market look at other products and it’s a competitive market.

Two alternatives for what happens NEXT: 1) settlement with the appearance of an NDA suggested by a changed review/take down, etc; or 2) a trial. Marketing droids people do not threaten serious 7 figure lawsuits.

 

[im_gumby]

Two alternatives for what happens NEXT: 1) settlement with the appearance of an NDA suggested by a changed review/take down, etc; or 2) a trial. Marketing droids people do not threaten serious 7 figure lawsuits.

Ah, ok...

So unless you're into litigation, meaning the lawsuit was filed... you may end up w a settlement that then gets covered by an NDA, however usually there's consideration for the NDA. But in cases like this... you will just see things drop and fade away.

In the dCS threat of legal action... it was the marketing VP that initiated it and brought lawyers into it.
That's why I mentioned them. They are officers of the company, but sometimes, not the most intelligent of folks.
Of course the founders of the company who have thin skins also go that route.

That said... even w a bad review... a great CEO would thank the reviewer and take the feedback to improve the product or the next release.

 

[pderousse]

I did not catch that it was initiated by the marketing people. I double down on my initial comment: this thing goes away. It is a big nothing.

And, I regret commenting altogether. This matter should have been filed in the round-file, and never brought to a discussion board about audio and music.

 

[Jim Taylor]

This matter should have been filed in the round-file, and never brought to a discussion board about audio and music.

I totally disagree with that! Yes, this is a messy affair, and yes, there have been some childish comments. There's a name for that: it's called The Internet.

If you've ever been the victim of a bully, you'd know right away that this whole affair should have definitely been aired in the light of day, and not been "filed in the round file".

Bullies love their affairs to be out of sight of the public.

Jim

 

[im_gumby]

I did not catch that it was initiated by the marketing people. I double down on my initial comment: this thing goes away. It is a big nothing.

And, I regret commenting altogether. This matter should have been filed in the round-file, and never brought to a discussion board about audio and music.

Sorry, just to clarify, the dCS legal threat against Golden Sound was the VP of Marketing. Not sure w Erin though.
Unfortunately you can't just round bin these threats.

You have to take them seriously... and even if you can get them tossed at the get go... that's still ~5K or more.

 

[Miguelón]

I don't know how many of you have been reading the Tekton review thread. But it seems that the company designer/owner has threatened Erin, forcing him to take down his video and written review of one of his speakers. As we all know, Erin's core contributions are measurements of the speaker and what he speaks of, is his subjective opinion. Neither of these is cause for threats of lawsuit and intimidation to take down a review with nary an attempt by the company to show what is in error. The right of a product owner to send what he has bought for testing and publication of the same is one of the most cherished things in my view. I hate to see Erin cave in just because he doesn't have the money to defend his work and injure consumer's rights in the process.

So what you all think about creating a fund to help him?

If you are in favor, someone needs to help setup the fund and let Erin know.

Edit: this is what we are dealing with:

UPDATE: Countless members have been supportive and committed to donating such a defense fund. Better yet, two member lawyers offered to help and I put one in touch with Erin. Progress is being made. Thank you everyone!

UPDATE 2: Erin got the support he needed and released his updated video. So at this point, we don't need to fund anything (although there is discussions around funding a general organization to help in these situations).

I don’t know how works the legal system in US, don’t you have a lawyer designated by the government in case of legal requirement?

Is ilegal also at US to express an opinion about an object or a service, if this opinion doesn’t incurs in accusations or calumnies?

 

[rdenney]

I don’t know how works the legal system in US, don’t you have a lawyer designated by the government in case of legal requirement?

Is ilegal also at US to express an opinion about an object or a service, if this opinion doesn’t incurs in accusations or calumnies?

No, it’s not criminal to express opinions, though it is criminal to defame individuals. Usually, though, the criminal burden of proof is too severe (“beyond a reasonable doubt”, unanimously found by the jurors ) to attract the interest of criminal prosecutors. But victims of defamation can seek relief in the civil courts, which do not involve publicly employed attorneys. This is expensive for all concerned, and the threat of that expense is intimidating. But the burden of proof in civil courts is much lower (“preponderance of the evidence”) and usually requires only 11 of 12 jurors to obtain a judgement, depending on the state, so most victims of defamation (as they believe themselves to be) seek redress through civil rather than criminal action.

Defamation usually requires a false statement, reckless disregard for the truth, intent to do harm, publication of the statement, and an unwillingness to retract the statement. It’s not easy to prove all those factors, but it is expensive to defend against a lawsuit accusing a person of defamation. Opinions cannot usually be defamatory if stated as opinions.

The only lawyers designated by the government in the USA are criminal prosecutors, judges (depending on the state; some are elected), and appointed criminal defense lawyers for those accused of crimes who cannot afford counsel.

Rick “not a lawyer” Denney

 

[CedarX]

No, it’s not criminal to express opinions, though it is criminal to defame individuals. Usually, though, the criminal burden of proof is too severe (“beyond a reasonable doubt”, unanimously found by the jurors ) to attract the interest of criminal prosecutors. But victims of defamation can seek relief in the civil courts, which do not involve publicly employed attorneys. This is expensive for all concerned, and the threat of that expense is intimidating. But the burden of proof in civil courts is much lower (“preponderance of the evidence”) and usually requires only 11 of 12 jurors to obtain a judgement, depending on the state, so most victims of defamation (as they believe themselves to be) seek redress through civil rather than criminal action.

Defamation usually requires a false statement, reckless disregard for the truth, intent to do harm, publication of the statement, and an unwillingness to retract the statement. It’s not easy to prove all those factors, but it is expensive to defend against a lawsuit accusing a person of defamation. Opinions cannot usually be defamatory if stated as opinions.

The only lawyers designated by the government in the USA are criminal prosecutors, judges (depending on the state; some are elected), and appointed criminal defense lawyers for those accused of crimes who cannot afford counsel.

Rick “not a lawyer” Denney

Can trashing a product ever be considered as defamation of the designer or company members behind the product? I thought it could not…

 

[SIY]

though it is criminal to defame individuals.

IANAL, but I'm fairly sure that is incorrect. It's a civil matter.

 

[SIY]

I don’t know how works the legal system in US, don’t you have a lawyer designated by the government in case of legal requirement?

No. That would mean that lawyers would make less money, and that will never pass muster here.

 

[BDWoody]

I don’t know how works the legal system in US, don’t you have a lawyer designated by the government in case of legal requirement?

For a criminal case, it is the government who brings the case against you, and if you can't afford an attorney the government will appoint you one. Most are familiar with the 'Miranda Warning' from watching TV, or from having been arrested .

In a civil case, none of that applies.

 

[doug s.]

Sorry I spent the legal fund on an expensive DAC, it will last a lifetime though.

and:

Making expensive artless products which require deceptive marketing to sell is not evil, but it is not great, either. Reviewing them and pretending to hear things which don't exist is not much better. At best it is a waste of time.

There are a lot of legal but compromising ways to make money in the world, I would encourage anyone to sacrifice a little money to not have to deal with the world of people who need to deceive others to take care of themselves or their loved ones.

oxymoron alert!

 

[Sal1950]

Here are the Supreme Court Judges.

Where do they park their raindeer ? LOL