MySwag.org The Off-road Camper Trailer Forum
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Ynot on August 07, 2013, 09:41:47 PM
-
It is shameful that some manufacturers will do whatever they can to stop consumers from speaking out.
Unfortunately the balance of comments here are usually in support of models and a lot of owners should feel disgruntled, and if they believe that their manufacturer behaves in this way should contact them to discuss.
I am fully supportive of the My Swag team and will make sure that my right to choose as a consumer will be exercised!
-
?????
-
What did I miss..
but agree with you... some are not worth pissing on.
-
http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=31568.0;topicseen#msg496070 (http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=31568.0;topicseen#msg496070)
Don't mention their name anymore. Lets call them Voldermort!
-
errrrrr fair enuf I spose, may need more input on this one i think
-
The first rule of Brand X, is we don't talk about Brand X.
-
You've got to be quick it seems......
Missed it all I think.
Nothing like a good scrap from behind the keyboard, or va the lawyers !!!
In my day, you met up behind bike shed or in the sand pit?
-
So in the future when someone asks a question re 'those who shall not be named', and you have to delete or deny the thread topic, that denial or deletion doesn't then tell a story? Don't envy the position this has put you in, but agree you have to act or have legal action taken.
Sad that any vendor would see this as a good course of action. Maybe a more positive/proactive action would have been to support the threads and respond to the questions or queries. this is what I see on many 4wd forums, and while the vendor may not like seeing the feedback, they have generally acted professionally and replied/responded as best they could.
-
Bloody dodgy companies out there these days. Can't say I can ever recommend a company that behaves in a certain way to anyone.
-
Some mouldy rotten tomatoes and rotten eggs by the carton should be enough to get the point across. Well, across the front windows at least
No mention of the three letter word that is now forbidden.
Rather sad really.................
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
-
Maybe we need a 'code word' or such for the 3 letter camper manufacture builder that we can no longer mention by name.........
Suggestions welcome!!
-
Hi Guys,
Just for info, for those who don't know I am the President of the Pathfinders Club of Australia, like Brett I also received a letter from the same solicitor today complaining about my forum. I would urge all My Swag members not to mention the particular Camper Trailer Manufacturers name on this forum as right or wrong you will only cause trouble for the Forum administrator
cheers
Carl
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
and 'vodermort' believes this kind of stunt is better suited, lmao, love to see one of these cases actually get to court, dodgy companies ( not necessarily voldermort) are very much in the publics interest, next it will be anyone who post's resturant reviews on there facebook page
-
???what happened
-
Maybe we need a 'code word' or such for the 3 letter camper manufacture builder that we can no longer mention by name.........
Suggestions welcome!!
Voldertmort, I already mentioned it, he who can't be spoken of!
Harry potter fans will appreciate.
-
The sad part is instead of working with the owner, and keeping up advertising for their product, they would rather do this....
I'll use the wayback machine site to see wht was said originally :D
-
Voldertmort, I already mentioned it, he who can't be spoken of!
Harry potter fans will appreciate.
Im not a fan, but thought that it was a pretty good analogy haha.
In all seriousness though, I for one am pretty pissed about the situation. And the reason more so than anything is that in my mind the mods and admin have on this particular topic tried to be fair and reasonable. AND this STILL happens.
At the end of the day though, we all as swaggers must do what we can that is in the best interest of MYSWAG as a form of social networking that we use and appreciate. If that means sucking it up and not mentioning Voldertmort, so that Brett and others don't cop any further form of burden by these special bunch of ingrates then that is what we must do.
Cheers
Evo
-
this thread is discussing them, and also describing them in not the best way.. I'd suggest this thread goes the way of the doe doe or it could be more letters for the owner....
(http://www.misplaced.net/stfu/ibtl.jpg)
-
Had a look at the thread listed on the letter.... Google search then look a the cache..... didn't look like anything out of the ordinary.... it looked more like voldermort dug the thread up and stated getting defensive....
Don't think this kind of behaviour does the brand any favours....
-
wikipedia is great.........
So far, theres been no mention of the 3 letter camper trailer builder/distributor who can no longer be named, In a positive or negative way on myswag.org, so no fear on any further such letters.
Sad day for myswag.org and undue grief caused for the administrators, but it could have been handled better and been better advertising for them, but now............. it just goes further downhill.
-
Maybe we need a 'code word' or such for the 3 letter camper manufacture builder that we can no longer mention by name.........
Suggestions welcome!!
You could always use one of our terms....Goona pilki......and I will not translate that here, but it is not very nice at all.
Tjupurula
-
The thing is if voltermolt, actually just improved their business they wouldn't have to go to lawyers. So now when someone joins and ask about, we all say, sorry we are not allowed to talk about them. That's good business practice.
-
The hardest part will be moderating it daily.
-
Its sad that the named can put more effort into shutting down a public post of feedback then they do in fixing any of the issues they have with the product.
I could say a lot more about those who shall not be named but i think the admins have it all covered.
-
Just wondering about the legalities of the letter and the threatened action. While I can fully understand the action taken by Brett and if this is the tactics they wish to use, I do not blame MySwag for never mentioning this brand of camper trailer, whatsoever. My understanding Brett has done nothing wrong, unless he is the one that made the post. Will have to make some further legal inquiries to find out if anything has been done for the letters threats to be real or just worthless threats
-
Just wondering about the legalities of the letter and the threatened action. While I can fully understand the action taken by Brett and if this is the tactics they wish to use, I do not blame MySwag for never mentioning this brand of camper trailer, whatsoever. My understanding Brett has done nothing wrong, unless he is the one that made the post. Will have to make some further legal inquiries to find out if anything has been done for the letters threats to be real or just worthless threats
Lets be honest, why risk it - and why not remove everything. Why give any PR - good or bad.
Exploroz has done the same in the past with a diesel tuning place in the southern area of NSW
anyway the thread was back 2011 - 2012
-
Just wondering about the legalities of the letter and the threatened action. While I can fully understand the action taken by Brett and if this is the tactics they wish to use, I do not blame MySwag for never mentioning this brand of camper trailer, whatsoever. My understanding Brett has done nothing wrong, unless he is the one that made the post. Will have to make some further legal inquiries to find out if anything has been done for the letters threats to be real or just worthless threats
To be honest here, it's Brett on the line here, wether he wrote anything or not he is ultimately responsible for the content of the forum and it, if it went that far, will be him in court and no one else, which is one of the reasons why he and 4x4 earth and the PCoA forums are removing the threads about the particular manufacturer.
Best thing you can all do is abide by Brett's decision and not to continue to contribute to this thread.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
and why not remove everything. Why give any PR - good or bad.
Exactly, stuff em.
Any new comers can just be directed to Bretts sticky post and make their own decisions......
I'm sure this will do more damage to their reputation and brand name, than one post with a few grumbles and gripes.
-
The following is a link from the Defamation Act NSW 2005:
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N)
The following has the definition of defamation and what one must prove etc as an example:
http://www.legal.unsw.edu.au/factsheets/defamation.html (http://www.legal.unsw.edu.au/factsheets/defamation.html)
The following headings are of note and should be read:
7 Distinction between slander and libel abolished
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N)
11 Choice of law for defamation proceedings
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N)
Division 2 Defences
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N)
-
Unfortunately in this day and age it's a common occurrence. In my previous life I owned a large forum with 60,000 members and getting a letter (or email) making all sorts of squeals and threats was a regular occurrence. Unfortunately many of the complaints made about certain companies were well founded and of genuine concern to the consumers who posted!
Cut a long story short, I adopted a no bull sh!t approach and most names were censored as part of my policy when such legal threats to the forum were made, needless to say that made the pursuant even worse sometimes BECAUSE their names were censored (good and the bad reviews and points). They wanted the bad points removed and the good points remaining! Go figure! On one occasion I then had further legal threats because their good points regarding their brands were censored! Go and figure. Sorry folks by that point it's too late.
Legitimate companies would generally talk first with out resort to this level of bullying and scare tactics and ultimately it does more harm than good.
Australian online defamation law is antiquated to say the least. You got to ask yourself - would you buy a product that didn't want to be discussed?....
-
I believe I now know which brand is being discussed. If they are that bad, we don't want any coming this way, that may mean too much extra work in repairs and the like, and we are far too remote for that.
Tjupurula
-
On another forum I frequent, similar things have happened where certain entities get upset. On one particular forum, if one writes the name of any of a number of "banned" entities, a string of asterisks appears in place of the company name.
I for one won't be buying any *** (Voldemort's) products.
-
believe I now know which brand is being discussed. If they are that bad, we don't want any coming this way,
On first reading that, I thought you were going to say they cant come because those names cant be said or discussed..!!!
I thought, wow, theyve really upset someone now?
Ha ha
-
The following is a link from the Defamation Act NSW 2005:
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N)
The following has the definition of defamation and what one must prove etc as an example:
http://www.legal.unsw.edu.au/factsheets/defamation.html (http://www.legal.unsw.edu.au/factsheets/defamation.html)
The following headings are of note and should be read:
7 Distinction between slander and libel abolished
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N)
11 Choice of law for defamation proceedings
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N)
Division 2 Defences
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+77+2005+cd+0+N)
And if you look at the Case mentioned in the threatening letter, Supreme Court of Victoria Trkulja v Google Inc and Anor, it does not appear to apply to MySwag. In saying that if this is the action the manufacture wishes to take then remove ALL reference to their brand altogether.
-
unfortunately, the problem is google and the internet exist. So any thing that is written can ultimately be found and trust me when I say google shows a heck of allot worse than anything that was ever mentioned in here. I wonder if the product review sites got the same letters?
smoke and mirrors guys. smoke and mirrors.........
Cheers
Evo
-
On first reading that, I thought you were going to say they cant come because those names cant be said or discussed..!!!
I thought, wow, theyve really upset someone now?
Ha ha
I consider MySWag as a second family, and if such a threat is going to be made against my second family, then I have the authority to say that something is not of good enough quality and we have no desire to be stuck with additional repairs. I can play such games as well.
Tjupurula
-
And if you look at the Case mentioned in the threatening letter, Supreme Court of Victoria Trkulja v Google Inc and Anor, it does not appear to apply to MySwag. In saying that if this is the action the manufacture wishes to take then remove ALL reference to their brand altogether.
Agree.
But also this is a public forum and therefor all posts on here are of each persons experience, if this one thing holds up it will be the end of posting about your favorite / not so favorite products on any forum.
Its true its on Brett's shoulders and he will have to fight it if he wishes to do so, but i also feel that he would have a good bit of defense due to the fact that the posts being made are the honest reports of customers or would be customers of these companies, if a person wishes to make a said post about a product then it should be allowed otherwise we might as-well shut down all posts about any products being good or bad because lets face it soon enough every company who has copped a bashing over a bad product will be lining up to get their lawyers involved.
I own a hosting company and understand the risks of keeping the posts and threads alive, ive also run large communities which are not for profit, at the end of the day its upto the person who has their name on the domain / server / site as owner to do what they will with the information.
If it was me i would make sure that all new users registering were shown that thread as a must read.
Nick.
-
Exactly, if I buy a product and it does not meet the standard you are lead to believe it should be and I make comment on a public forum, I am not making a defamatory comment as it is a factual statement. The next step would be to take the product back to the retailer. If the retailer fixed the problem, I make that comment on the same public forum, again nothing defamatory. If however the retailer refused to fix the problem and I posted that on the public forum, again it is a factual statement and not defamatory.
If I bought a product that had nothing wrong with it and for whatever reason posted on a public forum the product was rubbish and the retailer and manufacturer refused to fix it, because that is NOT a factual statement or an UNthruth, yes I am being defamatory.
Now if I was to post a defamatory comment here at MySwag, how is Brett, as the owner, going to know if it is defamatory or not. That is the problem Brett has, as does any other Forum owner. If the owner is served with a notice to have comments removed, well it is up to the individual forum owner what they do. I would be looking at just removing all reference to that particular brand, good bad or indifferent.
http://www.reputationhawk.com/onlinedefamation.html (http://www.reputationhawk.com/onlinedefamation.html)
What Is Defamation?
The publication or broadcast of any libelous or slanderous statement about an individual or business that can be proven to be false and published with the intention of harming that entity's reputation is considered to be defamation. Online defamation is the publication of such statements made on any Internet based media including blogs, forums, websites, and even social networking websites. While many Internet users believe that they are free to say and do as they like while on the Internet, this is untrue and the same defamation laws and regulations stand for online defamation as they do in any form of media.
The Difficulties With Proving Defamatory Comments
Much of the difficulty that surrounds successfully winning an online defamation case is brought about because the plaintiff must first prove who the publisher or writer of the statement is and, secondly, that the statement is false and written with the intention of causing damage.
Tracing an individual that has posted a defamatory comment can prove very difficult. It is certainly possible to find out the details of a computer that was used to publish a statement or post content. However, if this is a public computer then it is almost impossible to narrow down the search in order to find the culprit. With Internet access being afforded to computers in Internet cafes, libraries, businesses, and other public areas, this makes it very difficult to find the source of the illegal content.
-
If I buy a product and it does not meet the standard you are lead to believe it should be and I make comment on a public forum, I am not making a defamatory comment as it is a factual statement.
How do people reading your 'factual' comment determine fact from fiction? There-in lies the problem.
-
I think their laywers need to go back to law school and should be held to account for trying to intimidate a forum owner, the company in question im sure has more than 10 employees and therefore in nsw is not able to claim defamation (basically only a person can be defamed, a company is not a person in nsw - well if it has more than 10 employees it isnt a person). Its something that is in nsw legislation but not most other states.
Brett i suggest you consult a lawyer who specialises in defamation, they should be able to confirm the above, i also understand its easier to remove posts to remove the risk and back you up if thats the decision you make.
The company is gutless if it has to resort to this extreme, they should be able to handle debate about their product. I was thankful this site and others had info about them, it help me to look closer at ther quality, i chose another brand as a result.
Chris
Just to be clear im not a lawyer and the above is not to be considered legal advice
Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk 2
-
The problem in these situations is not whether the lawyers have any legitimate claim against the site administrators for the content posted, but what it would cost them to defend themselves against the charge.
An IT forum I moderate on had a similar issue several years ago, and chose to defend themselves. They ultimately won, but were only awarded partial legal costs, which also failed to address the loss of income the site owner suffered from having to take time off from his paid work, loss of advertising revenue, etc. It wound up costing the site owner in excess of $10,000, despite being found not liable.
It's bully-boy tactics, and a very clear indication, at least in my mind, that the company involved is trying to hide their dirty laundry. It comes as no real surprise when you see who they are in bed with - they are often the flagship camper choice for Tigerz11 & Roo Systems customers, based on Roothy's paid recommendation. Given how corrupt the whole EMG situation is, and the way they handled the Melbourne 4WD Show saga, is it any surprise they are resorting to this sort of behaviour?
Vote 1 for Roothy - Media censorship should be part of his campaign.
-
How do people reading your 'factual' comment determine fact from fiction? There-in lies the problem.
The other big problem is proving who wrote the subject comment in the first place. It may be posted by Username %$&^*%*&^%% but prove that it was Billy BLOGGS that wrote. MySwag is saved to my computer with the password, anyone could have accessed my computer, I didn't write it.
-
As an ex owner of a camper from this company, I reckon delete every post and thread from this forum.
We all know it ends bad as soon as a XXX thread is started. I have never known a camper company to draw so much heat and debate.
Personally, if nobody ever spoke of this brand again on any forum, it will be a good thing.
-
Not worth hassle.
Just delete all the Three Letter Word posts, good and bad, and be done with it.
Its a bad day for current #*# owners, but I'm sure the message will get through eventually. Dont give them the satisfaction of thinking they've won, just let them slip into the oblivion.
-
which is one of the reasons why he and 4x4 earth and the PCoA forums are removing the threads about the particular manufacturer.
It's a number of other forums as well, I won't name them but the tally is up to four so far.
An IT forum I moderate on had a similar issue several years ago, and chose to defend themselves. They ultimately won, but were only awarded partial legal costs, which also failed to address the loss of income the site owner suffered from having to take time off from his paid work, loss of advertising revenue, etc. It wound up costing the site owner in excess of $10,000, despite being found not liable.
I think I know which forum that was, and I totally agree. It is a lot of heartache for not a lot of return. The only people who benefit from defamation cases are lawyers.
-
The mods could put the three initialed brand into the swear filter, this would alter its appearance if someone typed it into the text.
I do feel sorry for Myswag members who own the brand and would like to discuss it openly on the forum.
Bearing in mind that Voldemont hasn't ask not to be discussed, just to have a thread removed, as he considers it damaging to his reputation ... or offensive and distressing as he put it. He's obviously happy to see a robust and honest debate, so long as there is no negative feedback. Sorry did I just say honest and open ... let's just try open.
Unfortunately the internet has become a conduit for vexatious and often litigious comment. Rules have been put into play to protect people and organisations from these actions, unfortunately these same rules apply to comments which although being somewhat close to the truth, are deemed to be detrimental to the recipient.
Litigation is a strange beast, ungainly, impractical and lacking of common sense. That's what makes it so dangerous. The moderators are more than justified in wanting to keep well away from it ... regardless of right or wrong ... taking the moral high ground in a situation like this would be pure folly.
-
Sadly I have not read any of the posts about "#", I feel like I missed out on the gossip.
Funny that another maker of CTs has coped a bit of flack here, and yet they are quick to come to their own defense on the forum.
Even though I have no dealings with these people, gives them credit in my mind for being willing to back their own service or product up publicly, perhaps as mentioned above, someone else could learn from them.
Just my 2 cents worth.
I think Brett has done the best thing, it is easier to walk away a lot of the time in matters such as this.
-
Well I think it might be time for a change then!!
-
I am in the market now for my first CT and the above company was one of the first brands I came across and on the surface looked good, but a quick search on the internet (and I mean not here, but review sites) revealed heaps of horror stories with customer service and product complaints, this just reaffirms my decision not to deal with the company.
In this day and age you cannot hide from the consumer anymore, I am in tourism and trip advisor etc have now almost taken over from AAA rating as a basis to judge a property, properties could fool AAA to some degree but not the consumer anymore.
Companies like the above need to adjust to the modern world and supply the best customer service and products or suffer the consequences.
-
I fully support Brett's decision. I think it needs to go one step further and the reference to "The camper that shall not be named" should be removed from signature lines, avatars and profiles. If this particular company wishes to be annonimous, then a complete removal of reference from forums will do more damage to their business than having negative comments posted.
When I am researching a product I google it, generally if the only response I find is advertising, then I have some alarm bells ring.
I think the smart way for this company to improve their reputation would be to improve quality and customer service, not bully their customers to only say good about them.
-
It is interesting the difference in approach demonstrated by different companies to comments raised on forums that they don't like.
There was a recent thread here that raised some concerns about a certain brand of bull bar. That company joined in and showed a real desire to investigate and try and sort the issue out, which they were able to do. The result is a very positive outcome for all involved, the person with the issue got it sorted out (even though it was of a third party's making as I recall) and the company demonstrated a real commitment to their products that will probably result in increased sales for them, a true win - win. Perhaps "the company who cannot be named" should consider adopting a similar approach rather than the very negative one that they have chosen to follow.
One word of caution, are we confident that the use of "Voldemort" is not going to offend JK Rowling? After all, she has a history of (successfully) taking legal action against people and has plenty of cash behind her to be able to do it ;D
-
I feel sorry for those people who own Voldemort trailers.
Will this ultimately mean they will not have the right to post about their own CT on here anymore?
I can see in the future there might be Malfoy CT's, Bellatrix Explorers, Deatheater Rearfolds etc etc if this madness continues.
I fully support Brett in this but Bully Boy tactics never end nicely. Lawyers are the only winners here.
-
i too feel for the members that own these trailers who would feel a little left out on the forum now as they cannot show off their pride and joy. where do they go for advice now or discuss the trailer?
-
Gee you have an early night for a change and look what happens.
It is amusing to see companies hiding behind 'the law' to defend themselves against social media rather than address actual customer concerns. They intimidate the small guys and not the big guys, I am sure they didn't send Facebook, Google & Bing a cease and desist. As we're all aware the artefacts are out there for all to see and easy to find, remember the 4x4show vs. 'insert another 3 letter acronym here' recently.
Brett and the admins you have done the right thing now let's get on with talking about campers and camping!
-
This thread is done as it could also be seen as feeding a fire that is NOT to be fed.
Anyone who has any of these comments in their signature lines MUST remove and clean it up, or we will have to clean it up for you.
There is no room for negotiation on this as Brett has stated.