[well known company] fraud (dot) com - Free Speech?

[amplify]

I’ve been reading in the forums that sites such as SomeCompanySucks.Com would be considered free speech, so would using the word fraud; to inform others of fraudulent activity at the company, also be considered free speech?

To go even further, could you have your logo as their logo with a clearly marked “R” trademark next to their image and let’s say a red stamp of “fraud” next to it, making: [well known company]FRAUD the image?

Thanks

 

[BidNo]

Disclaimer: Not a lawyer. To say someone/something "sucks" is simply stating an opinion. To say someone committed "fraud" is to directly accuse them of a crime (i.e. fraud is illegal). If you do this, I would say you had better have your facts straight and a lawyer in the wings. Possible exception would be if they've already been found guilty in a court of law.

Cheers,

 

[amplify]

I wanted to build the site into a community of people who feel they are ripped off by the said company. So, I wouldn't be the person solely calling fraud upon the company, but giving a forum to others to do so or to vent about billing cycles, poor customer service, accounts being deactivated, etc.

"Fraud" would be a freely used word; not as taking money deliberately and not returning it, but making mistakes or poor customer service which they advertise in commercials and other outlets. So, in my opinion, using the word "fraud" would also be in its correct term. However, the URL and website is only claiming the company and fraud-- not specifically me going into detail... If that makes sense? :?:

I was just wondering if I can use their registered trademark logo and place a "fraud" stamp next to it. I would post an example if I could... Or PM perhaps?

 

[ydnaemsti]

This would be legal. Check out wamufraud.com
Freedom of speech is absolute and it's not given by any constitution. You were born with it. Now, the measure of your commitment to freedom of speech is your willingness to defend speech you hate.

On the other hand the quote from the post above "Disclaimer: Not a lawyer."
is a living example free speech is not practiced in this world.

 

[stock_post]

Freedom of speech is absolute and it's not given by any constitution. You were born with it.

That is only valid statement in some countries and to some people only in some other countries.

 

[ydnaemsti]

This is actually how our constitution (USA) was written. Under our freedom of speech laws you can even make threats. Those were the rights "given" by constitution, but that does not mean you can't get sued for "hurting someone's feelings".

Our law and country system was based on the Roman system. Meaning, where there is law there are lawsuits.

Most cases like that end up with a SLAPP (Strategic lawsuit against public participation ) lawsuit.

 

[amplify]

So, I've come to the understanding that this is OK to do with the example of WamuFraud. How about using their actual logo though?

This is not the website and an obvious example of what I mean so that you may understand better:


Obviously, Google isn't a fraud. You can notice their registered trademark logo and next to it a "FRAUD" stamp.

Does this violate anything (trademark, copyright or otherwise)?

 

[ydnaemsti]

Let me ask you a question. Who designed and developed that logo? Did you design those G O O G L E letters?

I'm sure you understand where I'm going with this. The fraud part is not a problem, but the Google logo design is a problem.

If you had a text GoogleFraud.com title the reasons for a lawsuit would be limited.

 

[amplify]

So throw that idea out of the bag. I was 99% sure it wasn't legal, but that 1% if it were-- I had to use it for name recognition.

What about designing something similar to their logo with the stamp? Could problems still arise?

 

[wussadotcom]

So, I've come to the understanding that this is OK to do with the example of WamuFraud. How about using their actual logo though?

This is not the website and an obvious example of what I mean so that you may understand better:


Obviously, Google isn't a fraud. You can notice their registered trademark logo and next to it a "FRAUD" stamp.

Does this violate anything (trademark, copyright or otherwise)?

Well http://www.paypalsucks.com/ doesn't seem to have any problem at all even after a suit by Paypal.

 

[amplify]

Here is an example of what I mean:
http://img15.imageshack.us/i/googlefraud2.gif

It's obviously not the authentic Google logo, however it follows the same color scheme as it. Legal or not?

 

[ydnaemsti]

Now it's getting complex, because if you designed a google like logo and you were selling search engine ads on the site making people think this is google than yes there is a case. If you designed something like google and your site was complaining about how unfair they are and those complains were true the case against you would be week.

Big companies have that weapon SLAPP and they use it when their opposition grows to a point when they start losing business. You also have bunch of weapons againts them like: BBB, class action and etc.

I would have to see your entire project to decide. Use common sense when playing with legal issues, especially going against someone.

PayPalSucks.com is a great example. Paypal violated a law and treated people wrong. That's why they have no problems.

 

[amplify]

PayPalSucks.com is a great example. Paypal violated a law and treated people wrong. That's why they have no problems.

After seeing PayPalSucks and knowing that this said company has tried similar things such as suspending accounts after XXXgb and it not be in their TOS, billing for services not received, and the list goes on about them... I suppose it violates laws.

I suppose once it's developed, I'll ask for advice here on what should be changed before it's released to the general public. Thanks for WamuFraud & PayPalSucks-- haven't seen them before so it put light on my project.

Thanks for all your input

 

[ydnaemsti]

I was a victim of Wamu that's why I knew it very well. PatriotAct screwed few things up for us citizens. It's harder now, but still possible to legally oppose against corporate fraud.

 

[Tia Wood]

Consumer Warning & Alert sites are allowed.

 

[ydnaemsti]

Everything is allowed lol, but you still can get sued. I think the question in the subject is how far can you warn and alert? Lol

 

[amplify]

Consumer Warning & Alert sites are allowed.

My real issue was if using their logo + my design of a "FRAUD" stamp was legal.

 

[BidNo]

I don't see where ydn states he's a lawyer. You may want to read up on "fraud" (i.e. "fraud is a crime"), "libel"/"defamation" and original advice before going too far. If I were a well known company and you accused me of fraud on the internet, without a doubt you should expect a lawsuit -- happens a lot.

In the US, free speech allows you to freely state opinions and experiences but doesn't protect you if you slander or libel someone. Likewise free speech doesn't entitle one to shout "FIRE" in crowded theaters.

 

[w11guy]

Whether it's legal or not, you would have a lawsuit right away and if you don't have plenty of money to defend it you'll be banrupt pretty quickly.

If anyone set up a website with my company name and fraud together, I'd have my lawyers onto it right away. To me this is saying that the company involved is acting fraudulently and I'm pretty sure this is how a UK court would see it.

Lots of companies provide really bad service and these cases should be highlighted, but it isn't fraud. It's mostly incompetence.

If you think a fraud has been committed then you should report it to the police.

I don't think this is a good idea at all. I think you will live to regret it if you go ahead with it.

 

[amplify]

3.any deception, trickery, or humbug: That diet book is a fraud and a waste of time.
If you deceive me into believing that I can have uninterrupted 50gb down internet and I download constantly till 250gb (which can be approximately 14 hours), then all the sudden have no internet-- does this fall into a category of fraud?