STATUS: Defendant's motion for summary judgment granted on May 4, 2011
C.D. Cal.: Ripoff Report Gets Another Big 47 USC 230 Win
Technology and Marketing Blog (Eric Goldman)
Keeping alive its truly remarkable winning streak, Ripoff Report got yet another decisive 47 USC 230 victory. This challenge came from Asia Economic Institute (AEI), suing over 6 posts to Ripoff Report from former AEI employees complaining about the work environment. The case raised some eyebrows last summer when the judge gave AEI a chance to plead a RICO claim. That ruling got some plaintiffs excited that a conspiracy theory might finally expose Ripoff Report to liability. No matter, as it turns out, because AEI still lost on summary judgment.
http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2011/06/ripoff_report_g_2.htm
--Opinion: Asia Economic Institute v. Xcentric Ventures LLC
http://www.scribd.com/doc/54737754/Asia-Economic-Institute-v-Xcentric-Summary-Judgment
See also
--Order Granting In Part Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment: Asia Economic Institute v. Xcentric Ventures LLC
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35081047/AEI-v-Xcentric-Summary-Judgment-Ruling
--First Amended Complaint: Asia Economic Institute v. Xcentric Ventures LLC
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35081088/AEI-v-Xcentric-First-Amended-Complaint
Showing posts with label RipOff Report. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RipOff Report. Show all posts
Xcentric Ventures, LLC v. Bird, No.CV-09-01033-PHX-ROS (D. Ariz. Feb. 4, 2010)
STATUS: DISMISSED.
A lawyer-blogger posted an article analyzing lawsuits against RipOff Report, an internet publication; her article contained at least one error, and Xcentric Ventures (which owns RipOff Report) brought suit alleging defamation and "aiding and abetting" tortious acts by others. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds, forcing plaintiffs to prove jurisdiction. To meet their burden, the plaintiffs had to meet the "effects" test established by Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783, 789-90 (1984). The court held that while (1) the defendant had committed an intentional act in publishing the article, (2) it was not expressly aimed at the forum state (and did not consider whether the third factor was met -- whether the act caused harm, the brunt of which is suffered and which the defendant knows is likely to be suffered in the forum state). The court considered the second prong most, noting that apart from alleging that Defendants knew Plaintiffs were Arizona residents when the article was published (established only by circumstantial evidence), plaintiffs "did not allege any facts to support a connection between Arizona and the article." In accord with numerous other district courts, the court found that plaintiffs had not met their burden of proving jurisdiction.
Links and court documents
Complaint, filed May 4, 2009
Ripoff Report Sues Blogger, Loses on Jurisdictional Grounds, Technology & Marketing Law Blog, Feb. 12, 2010
Order Granting Motion to Dismiss, Feb. 4, 2010
A lawyer-blogger posted an article analyzing lawsuits against RipOff Report, an internet publication; her article contained at least one error, and Xcentric Ventures (which owns RipOff Report) brought suit alleging defamation and "aiding and abetting" tortious acts by others. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds, forcing plaintiffs to prove jurisdiction. To meet their burden, the plaintiffs had to meet the "effects" test established by Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783, 789-90 (1984). The court held that while (1) the defendant had committed an intentional act in publishing the article, (2) it was not expressly aimed at the forum state (and did not consider whether the third factor was met -- whether the act caused harm, the brunt of which is suffered and which the defendant knows is likely to be suffered in the forum state). The court considered the second prong most, noting that apart from alleging that Defendants knew Plaintiffs were Arizona residents when the article was published (established only by circumstantial evidence), plaintiffs "did not allege any facts to support a connection between Arizona and the article." In accord with numerous other district courts, the court found that plaintiffs had not met their burden of proving jurisdiction.
Links and court documents
Complaint, filed May 4, 2009
Ripoff Report Sues Blogger, Loses on Jurisdictional Grounds, Technology & Marketing Law Blog, Feb. 12, 2010
Order Granting Motion to Dismiss, Feb. 4, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)