Using a Typo for Good

[jjgallow]

I'm a p$%$sed off consumer who is angry with a very large corporation for ripping me off. I've acquired a typo domain to the corporation, which receives a surprising number of hits. What are the legal ramifications of forwarding this typo to a consumer advocate site I have created to protest the large corporation?

Essentially:

LargeCorporation.com typo forwards to LargeCorporationSucks.com, which provides consumer-related content regarding the questionable policies and practices of the company.

No money is made, and there are no advertisements.

...I basically see it is the online equivalent of a Guy parking his car outside of a dealership with "Lemonade" written across it. But....legal suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[fab]

Try posting this in the legal forum.

[Focus]

Go for it dude...no worse than parking it for money! (which is what you really should do)

ps- this is not legal advice duh

[jjgallow]

Thanks for the response..


Yeah, I'd like to post it in the legal forum but there's some newbie restriction on my username which won't let me (although I've been a member for several years).

If one of the moderators is interested in moving this post, I'd definitely appreciate it.

As for raising money on the site, there are many instances posted in the legal forum about getting sued for doing just that. What I'm interested in is if there will be legal ramifications for what will Definitely be defamatory and damaging remarks about the company (although entirely true, and justified).

In reality, most corporations would hate such a site FAR more than any ad site. The question is if they'd have any legal course of action to do anything about it.

cheers

[simon]

you can see the example of www.paypalsucks.com

[sunja]

yes but beware the legal issues surrounding fordsucks.com

[FuseFX]

Moved to Legal Section.

[cyberlaw]

I don't really know what to say. If the corporation wants to fight it, you can be pretty sure you're not going to be the favorite, and this kind of use won't do anything to help your cause, right?

[BELLC1]

I did something similar in 1996 when the Internet was still inaccessable for most people. Basically, a national company sold me a bad product, but because it was a custom size they wouldn't fix it or make good. I took out a website which basically said, "To the thousands of consumers who will see this website, run like heck from this company because..." and I went on to tell the story.

I then sent an email to the CEO of that company with a copy of the website and where it can be found and how it will be picked up by search engines and forever be out there for his potential customers to see.

Within 2 days, three regional reps were flown in to my location to correct the problem. It was only a $1000 problem, but it was a problem. All of a sudden, they bent over backwards to get me taken care of and even paid for laborers and packers.

I agreed then to take the website down.

Now lots of consumers have tried to get satisfaction with this type of response, however, apparently it may not be as effective as it used to be, back in the days when people were scared of the internet.

[draggar]

I don't really know what to say. If the corporation wants to fight it, you can be pretty sure you're not going to be the favorite, and this kind of use won't do anything to help your cause, right?

That all depends. There has been an anti-company site for the company I work for that has been up for years. They tell consumers how to commit fraud, get freebies, etc.. within the company. They show tricks of the trade, how to cheat, etc..

The company took them to court a few times but never won due to some loopholes, even though he made his site to look exactly like the old company's design.

In fact, I think there has been a few cases where CompanyA tries to take down CompanyASucks.com, loses and gets a really bad PR rap because of it.

[cyberlaw]

You're right draggar, there are always different facts involved, but again, I don't like the OP's chances given what I know.

[jjgallow]

Thanks for all the feedback....

Looks like I have a lot to consider. Being a generally positive person, I'd like to focus my time in more constructive things, but....we'll see.

cheers

[Brett Lewis]

The public has a right to gripe online. That said, if you set up a gripe site, if the domain name you use is the same as or too similar to the company's name, generally, panels will rule against the domain name holder. There are quite a few cases where panels will even find a <companysucks.com> site to be confusingly similar to a company's name. In those cases, I'd have to assume that the company's products sucked so badly that the public could not tell the difference between the company's site and the gripe site.

I'm not familiar with any judicial opinions on the subject, but suspect there are likely some out there.

Also, be careful what you call "defamatory" content. If it's truthful, it's not defamatory. If it's not truthful, you may have a bigger problem than the one you started out with.

[draggar]

The public has a right to gripe online. That said, if you set up a gripe site, if the domain name you use is the same as or too similar to the company's name, generally, panels will rule against the domain name holder. There are quite a few cases where panels will even find a <companysucks.com> site to be confusingly similar to a company's name. In those cases, I'd have to assume that the company's products sucked so badly that the public could not tell the difference between the company's site and the gripe site.

What happened with my company and mycompanysucks.com is that the site was taken to court and threatened legal action several times *but* even though the site was similar to my company's older design, he had at least 2 disclaimers on the index page and one on every page stating that he was not the company, in no way affiliated with the company, and had a link to the company.

That was his saving grace. It was clear that he was not affiliated with my company in any way.

Also, be careful what you call "defamatory" content. If it's truthful, it's not defamatory. If it's not truthful, you may have a bigger problem than the one you started out with.

True, this guy also stuck with the facts and had legal disclaimers all over his forums that he was not responsible for what people posted. Stick to the facts and if you post an opinion, make it 100% clear that it is your opinion and back it up with facts.

It is my opinion that (company) sucks because they.....