INCLUDE_DATA

Litigation

Litigation

August 15, 2010

Action, Reaction

yosamRightHaven LLC, the swarmy, scurrilous legal troll is generating heat. Folks are organizing to prepare to fight their tactics. –

If you are a mom and pop blogger, getting hit with a Federal lawsuit out of the blue has got to be terrifying. Many of those being sued by RightHaven LLC do not have deep pockets and are afraid that they will lose everything. Clayton Cramer reported that some of those being sued will probably have to declare bankruptcy.

Fortunately, its seems that the victims and those opposed to RightHaven’s tactics have started to organize. Realizing that information is key, a new website has been established called RightHavenLawsuits.com. They say their mission “is dedicated to gathering together and posting for the public information about Righthaven LLC.” They have links to some of the lawsuits as well as articles on RightHaven LLC.

Another website called RightHaven Victims lists every individual, business, and blog that has been sued by RightHaven LLC for copyright violations. It encourages those sued to work together to share information and to unite to form a collective front against RightHaven LLC. They realize that one of the keys to RightHaven’s success will be the use of a “divide and conquer” strategy. This website is also sharing defense strategies being used by the defendants.

Source
My hat off to those preparing to make a stand. A first logical move is that every defendant request a change of venue to their locale. Make the actual charging as expensive as possible. If it becomes economic to file the charges RightHaven will fold and the suits will go away.

Good luck to you all.

Filed under Big Media, Litigation by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print Comment

May 25, 2010

Verizon Into Explosives?

bullshit_pileTo be fair, the lede is a little misleading. The perp in question that made the threat is a contractor to Verizon. But like we say here on Third Pipe — ‘You are Who you Hire.’ –

Al Burrows of Las Cruces, New Mexico, sued Verizon Wireless in Santa Fe’s 1st Judicial District Court on April 20, claiming violations of state and federal debt collections laws, as well as “negligent infliction of emotional distress”–for which he wants the telecom giant to pay punitive damages. As of May 25, Verizon had yet to respond to a summons.

According to the lawsuit, last year Verizon bill collectors were making calls “too numerous to count” to Burrows over a relative’s unpaid cell phone bill.

When he hung up on one of these calls, the Verizon rep called him back, and grew “vulgar” and “abusive” in an attempt “harass and intimidate” Burrows.

“In particular, [Verizon's] representative stated that she knew where [Burrows] resided and said ‘I am gonna blow your mother fucking house up.’”

A suit is pending so VZ is in the closed clam mode. But you know, get a few of these kind of actions and it destroy’s the brand. We have seen stuff like this in VZ’s name from collectors, field reps, salesman, etc. They need to tighten up the contractual relationship of who they associate with.

HT: Sante Fe Reporter

Filed under Verizon by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print Comment

May 17, 2010

From the Life is Interesting Dept.

tea-party-vintageDid you know that data comm billing can ruin your love life?

A Toronto woman says the billing practices of Rogers Wireless Inc. led to her husband discovering her extramarital affair.

Now the woman, whose husband walked out, is suing the communications giant for $600,000 for alleged invasion of privacy and breach of contract, the results of which she says have ruined her life.

In 2007, Gabriella Nagy had a cellphone account with Rogers which sent the monthly bill to her home address in her maiden name. Her husband was the account holder for the family’s cable TV service at the same address. Around June 4, 2007, he called Rogers to add internet and home phone.

The following month, Rogers mailed a “global” invoice for all of its services to the matrimonial home that included an itemized bill for Nagy’s cellular service, according to the statement of claim filed in Ontario Superior Court of Justice.

When Nagy’s husband opened the Rogers invoice, he saw several hour-long phone calls to a single phone number.

“Nobody does business this way and he’s not stupid,” says Nagy, who is in her 30s. He called the number, spoke to the “third party” who confirmed the affair, which had lasted only a few weeks, Nagy told the Star.

“My husband didn’t tell me that’s how he found out, he just left.”

Moral of the story — Don’t cheat AND if you are going to, then at least have the smarts to order a separate phone AND carrier!

Heh.

Linky.

Filed under marketplaces, mergers by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print 2 Comments

January 5, 2010

Only the Best Legal Minds that Telco Cash can Buy

wormsI’ll be blunt — this stinks!

“People are paying money in to go to college,” she said, “I don’t think any of that money should be used to subsidize the broadband effort that really is competing with the private sector.”

– Sen. Lisa Marrache, the assistant Senate majority leader

Oh, you are asking what’s the argument? The Univ of Mass is considering going into partnership with several communities and private enterprise in rural Maine locations to get broadband to these localities that are not being served now. The beef of course is that the University is competing with private enterprise. —

Marrache said constituents raised the issue with her after charges were leveled this summer that UMS is competing with private companies in the broadband business.

Severin Beliveau, an Augusta attorney representing FairPoint, blasted UMS at a meeting of the State Broadband Advisory Council, arguing their participation in a group seeking federal funds was improper competition with the private sector.

“I am concerned at what the university is proposing here, because it is receiving a form of subsidy, no they are in fact receiving a subsidy from taxpayers, in competing with the private sector,” he said.

Jeff Letourneau, associate director of information technology at UMS, said the university is part of a private-public partnership created to provide broadband capacity at a “wholesale” level and the university’s role is minor.

“The grant from the federal government went to GWI [Great Works Internet] and two private investors,” he said. “As for tuition subsidizing our broadband efforts, that does not happen and will not happen.”

I am a dirty stinking capitalist of the first order. There are not many $$ deals I won’t turn down. (Though there are moral ones I won’t touch.) But if private companies don’t want to service these areas; and that has been the case for Verizon, now FairPoint for years, then by God you have no right to complain. You were offered a franchise there Telcos, decided it was not worth your effort and now complain when your unopened candy bar is taken away from you. Pffft, tough. Capitalism works best when there is fair exchange going on. Capitalism does not work where monopolistic haunch sitting goes on and the citizenry suffer as a consequence.

Which brings me to the title of this missive. You have to ask yourself whose ox gets gored if UofMaine went thru with the deal? Why the resident Telco is who. That ladies and gentlemen has to be the back story. As a fellow conservative I know says — flare drops. This is only a cover to prevent competition.

Serve your constituents Marrache.

Link.
HT:WetMachine.

Filed under Duopoly Follies, Legislation / Regulation, Litigation, Municipalities, competition by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print Comment

Heh. Only in Verizon Land

yosamYes, with all that goes on in the telecom world there is always room for a lawsuit! Only this time Verizon is not the Plaintiff —

Located at 375 Pearl Street in Manhattan, the TriBeca Trib reports that the city is now suing Verizon and real estate company Taconic Investment Partners for $53 million. Allegedly the city lost that much money after what they claim were fraudulent dealings.

When they purchased the land and air rights from the city in 1972, “the agreement called for the phone company to give the city $17 million and to build Murry Bergtraum High School. But, the city says, New York Telephone built far more usable space—1.2 million square feet—than it said it would, thereby undervaluing the deal and shortchanging taxpayers.”

What’s a couple of thousand square feet of space between friends in one of the highest priced markets in the world?

More here.

Filed under Litigation, Verizon by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print Comment

November 12, 2009

Whack! Then its Gone

yosam

COSHOCTON — A free service enjoyed by hundreds has been shut down due to illegal activity conducted by one individual.

“It’s unfortunate that one person ruins it for those who use the service legitimately,” said Commissioner Gary Fisher.

About five years ago, the county made a free wireless Internet connection available in the block surrounding the Coshocton County Courthouse at 318 Main St.

It was disabled last week after someone used the wireless local area network address to illegally download a movie.

The county’s Internet Service Provider — OneCommunity — was notified by Sony Pictures Entertainment about the breach, and the county’s Information Technology Department was in turn notified by OneCommunity.

Yes you got it. The actions of one person has ruined it for a whole town. Which is the problem with the current state of law in the realm of Internet Law. The innocent suffer along with the guilty.

‘Nuf Said?

Linky.

Filed under Legislation / Regulation, Litigation, Wireless by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print Comment

November 4, 2009

Elephants at War

dinosaur.gifWhen two elephants start a fracas in the room what is the best course of action? Get the Hell out of the room of course! Well that is what is preparing to go on between Verizon and AT&T. The two are locked horns on the coverage map ads that Verizon is running in reference to their 3G wireless network

I hope the judge has a good sense of humor. He will need it for this case. –

In essence, we believe the ads mislead consumers into believing that AT&T doesn’t offer ANY wireless service in the vast majority of the country. In fact, AT&T’s wireless network blankets the US, reaching approximately 296M people. Additionally, our 3G service is available in over 9,600 cities and towns. Verizon’s misleading advertising tactics appear to be a response to AT&T’s strong leadership in smartphones. We have twice the number of smartphone customers… and we’ve beaten them two quarters in a row on net post-paid subscribers. We also had lower churn — a sign that customers are quite happy with the service they receive.

The fun part of this? Like these two companies don’t have something else to do? Like maybe lay some fiber or something? But it is par for the course in the Telco industry. Now I suspect that why AT&T did this has little to do with the ads and more to do with some underlying cross interlata agreement they have been locking horns on. You don’t burn $1,000/hr in legal costs for this kind of piddly stuff.

Endgadget has the gory details.

Filed under AT&T, Litigation, Verizon by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print Comment

October 12, 2009

Frontier to Give Back ETF $$

ernestine2

The New York State Attorney General has slapped Frontier Communications with a $35,000 fine and ordered the phone company to refund up to $50,000 it wrongfully charged consumers in so-called “early termination fees” for telephone and broadband service — fees consumers were never properly informed about at the time they ordered service.

“Frontier failed to spell out in its contracts the existence of costly fees,” said Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo. “The company is now fixing the issue by providing written notices of these fees and paying back consumers who were wrongfully charged.”

What can I say? Live by the scheme, die by the scheme. If you live in NY proper and were hit with a ETF for service termination keep your eyes open. Some money is due you.

Linky.

Filed under Litigation by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print Comment

October 11, 2009

Phone Kops, For Real

arai9za_van_laser.jpg
Dr. Johnny Fever, explaining the plot to blow up the station radio transmitter. Sounds funny, crazy as a concept, right? Or is it? —

“The communications between the agencies and telecommunications companies regarding the immunity provisions of the proposed legislation have been regarded as intra-agency because the government and the companies have a common interest in the defense of the pending litigation and the communications regarding the immunity provisions concerned that common interest.”

U.S. District Court Judge Jeffery White disagreed and ruled on September 24 that the feds had to release the names of the telecom employees that contacted the Justice Department and the White House to lobby for a get-out-of-court-free card.

“Here, the telecommunications companies communicated with the government to ensure that Congress would pass legislation to grant them immunity from legal liability for their participation in the surveillance,” White wrote. “Those documents are not protected from disclosure because the companies communicated with the government agencies “with their own … interests in mind,” rather than the agency’s interests.”

Yes, the government is advocating that AT&T, Verizon and Sprint are arms of the Federal government for purposes of this court case. The whole idea sounds almost Pythonesque if it wasn’t for the government trying that line of reasoning and hoping it sticks.

Linky.

Filed under Litigation by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print Comment

August 22, 2009

Who’s on First, or When Oligarchies Collide

Apple and AT&T have an agreement in principle that neither party would partake of supporting anything that injuries the other party in any material fashion. AT&T is concerned about users foregoing the voice components on iPhone and using the data component via VoIP. Google then shows up with an application for the iStore to do exactly what AT&T does not want. Is it rejected? Welllll, not exactly, but then you can’t download it either –

AT&T and Apple told the FCC that they did have an agreement that Apple would not help iPhone owners use VOIP calling services like Skype on the iPhone. VOIP calls use the data, rather than the voice plan, and would cut into the companies profits. Thus, Apple and AT&T agreed to cripple the Skype iPhone app so that it would only work when the iPhone used a WiFi connection.

The companies say they also agree not to let apps that stream live television, which AT&T says would strain its network.

As for Google and its app store?

Its FCC filing emphasizes that Android phone users can get apps from outside the store — unlike iPhone users. (Users can “jailbreak” their iPhones to do so, but this invalidates the warranty.)

It says only one percent of apps in its online marketplace have been rejected, mostly due to copyright or obscenity reasons.

Google did not, however, mention that it too crippled mobile apps at the request of a telecom.

T-Mobile asked Google to remove apps that let customers use their phone as a modem for a laptop, a practice known as tethering, and Google complied. T-Mobile, like all of the U.S.’s largest carriers, charges customers extra for that service. Google later re-allowed the app, but not for T-Mobile customers.

Is Google the unvarnished victim in this? The maiden for her prince to open the gates? Well not exactly either. Google is doing the same thing for T-Mobile on Android platforms. Google you can pucker up, but wash your shoes first, they reek of BS.

All this jockeying and “where’s the pea” is going for naught too. Wimax is continuing to rollout. The following cities are targeted this year — Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, Fort Worth, Honolulu, Las Vegas, Philadelphia, Portland, Seattle. Wimax is already in Atlanta, NYC, Los Angeles and the outskirt of WashDC. So many of the mass market areas are in coverage. The upshot is the Wimax providers are not freaking out that VoIP will traverse their network. Fact some providers are offering bundles that include VoIP. So the cat’s already out of the bag. Fact some are considering using a “netbook-as-phone”.

By the way Who if on first and What is on second and Google is in the outfield. Google still has not understood how damaging their lack of 700mhz ownership means to them over the long haul.

Linky.

Filed under 3g, 4g, 700 mHz, Litigation, Wifi, Wimax, new technology by Dr. Dog

Permalink Print 4 Comments

 

Go Daddy $14.99 SSL Sale!

 

ss_blog_claim=499bf3240b2f94786784658946b8559e
ss_blog_claim=499bf3240b2f94786784658946b8559e