H1 2012 Quick Links, Part 5 (Consumer Reviews, Content Regulation, Miscellaneous)

…into their contracts to suppress negative online reviews. * Ascentive, LLC v. Opinion Corp., 2012 WL 1569573 (E.D.N.Y. May 3, 2012). Ascentive voluntarily dismissed its lawsuits against PissedConsumer without prejudice….

Another Bad Ruling for PissedConsumer on Trademark and 47 USC 230 Claims–Amerigas v. Opinion Corp.

…between Amerigas and PissedConsumer. Likelihood of Consumer Confusion. PissedConsumer won the Ascentive case in part for lack of consumer confusion. However, that was in response to Ascentive’s preliminary injunction motion…

PissedConsumer Denied Section 230 Immunity and Can’t Shake Extortion Claim—Vo v. Opinion Corp.

…cash ($5k) to PissedConsumer. Instead it sued PissedConsumer for a potpourri of claims. PissedConsumer moved to dismiss the lawsuit, and the resulting opinion is a mixed bag. Some highlights: Defamation….

Reputation Management Lawsuit Is Shot Down–Bernard v. Donat

…at Complaintsboard and PissedConsumer, attack emails and postings to Scribd. Bernard sued Donat for Lanham Act false advertising, defamation and tortious interference. In this ruling, Judge Whyte dismisses the Lanham…

Top Internet Law Developments of 2011

…Boop to the world. * PhoneDog v Kravitz. An interesting battle over ownership of a Twitter account. * Levitt v Yelp/Ascentive v. PissedConsumer. 47 USC 230 still works really, really…

Attempted Trademark Workaround to 47 USC 230 Immunity Fails Badly—Ascentive v. PissedConsumer [Catch-Up Post]

…clear that PissedConsumer is not using plaintiffs’ marks as source identifiers at all.” Well, that’s only partially true–PissedConsumer is using the plaintiffs’ marks as referents for the plaintiffs. (See Deregulating…

Nov.-Dec. 2011 Quick Links, Part 1

…of Scam.com and PissedConsumer reports about it. Hello 47 USC 230! * Techdirt: Dentist Who ‘Invoiced’ Patient For Negative Reviews, Getting Slammed On Yelp. Prior blog post. Content Regulation *…

Ripoff Report May Be “Appalling,” But It Still Gets 47 USC 230 Immunity–Giordano v. Romeo

…business model (I’ll explain more in my forthcoming post on Ascentive v. PissedConsumer), and I continue to have reservations that inaccurate information can remain on the Internet even if judges…

Rip-off Report Back in Court

…Report’s trademarks by creating and using the URL “http://rip-off-report.pissedconsumer.com” and putting “Rip-off Report” in the site metatags. Hmm…does Rip-off Report really want to establish the precedent that these activities infringe???…