3 ms·
That doesn't make much sense. I've written a lot of blog posts and a lot of email and I can't say that the latter takes longer than the former. The irony in t
by wheels 18y ago
That doesn't make much sense. I've written a lot of blog posts and a lot of email and I can't say that the latter takes longer than the former.
The irony in the "this could have been a lawsuit" is that their reply could have been too, since I suspect they'd have a pretty good case for a defamation suit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law#Defamation_per_se http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law#De...
- Semiapies 18y agoA blog post gets to more people than an email. I wouldn't like GS's chances if they'd tried a slap-suit against 37S, even if they hadn't publicly admitted every factual point, apologized, and blamed every "misinterpretation" of their motives on their own poor communication skills.
- wheels 18y agoI'm not disputing the trademark issue. I think 37s would have a pretty good case there. But 37s went beyond there to call them extortionists and other implications of illegal activity (not connected to trademark infringement), which is where they crossed the (legal) line.
- Semiapies 18y agoI think that if you carefully re-read Fried's original post, you'll note that he at no point accused them of actually engaging in any other illegal activities. His remarks were carefully worded; I wouldn't be terribly surprised if a lawyer had looked at it at some point. (This is why I've been left wondering at people who saw the post as a tossed-off rant. It was a detailed, edited, and thoughtful complaint.)
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]
- wheels 18y agoFrom the original, "As if the threatening language and false accusations weren't enough, now there’s extortion too!" How is that not claiming that they're engaging in extortion?
- Semiapies 18y agoThey can reasonably say they were referring to the casual meaning of the term and not accusing the GS guys of showing up at their office and making a coy speech about how "accidents" and "fires" can just happen.
- wheels 18y agoYou mean right after they compared them to a mafioso protection scheme? Amusingly, if you click on the wikipedia link above, and follow the reference to the bit on per se defamation, the example given is claiming that someone extorted money that did not.
- Semiapies 18y agoIf you really believe your assertion that Fried's post was legally defamatory instead of harsh criticism, why not find a lawyer and show him/her the text of that post? GS certainly don't seem to think they would have a case.
- calambrac 18y agoOf course one blog post doesn't take longer than one email. But one blog post that nips things like this in the bud going forward is a hell of a lot shorter than emails+waiting for action+follow up for however many n companies try to pull this nonsense.
- wheels 18y agoI suspect this would have accomplished things real fast: "Guys x, y and z need to change in the next week or we're going to rip you apart on our blog and possibly sue for trademark violation. -37s"
- calambrac 18y agoFor GS. Maybe. Then rinse and repeat for other companies that pull the same thing in the future. Plus a private email does nothing for the little guys that have no clout, who would be completely ignored if they made the same complaints. 37s helped far more people than themselves by doing this.
- wheels 18y agoThe latter however is a separate (and valid) point. I'm not against them being pressured; I think that was the right thing to do and I'd not have backed down until they made the change more generally, but I think that could have been done just as quickly and easily (with this specific company, not some other one that we're not talking about) in private. I'm a founder too, so I'm mostly imagining myself in their shoes and how angry I'd be if somebody took a very public swing at my company without giving me a chance to make it right. I'm sure the 37s guys are as protective of "their baby". ;-)