Legal action against comments about wine on a blog

Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Attention readers: Charles Smith may be suing you

Last week I received notice from Google that K Vintners and its winemaker Charles Smith are suing some people who commented anonymously on my site.

I am not named as a party in the lawsuit. But if you are one of my readers, you might be.

This post is a courtesy to you. Google received a subpoena demanding that it provide the Internet protocol addresses of the people who made the comments.

Google Legal Support wrote to me, "To comply with the law, unless you provide us with a copy of a filed motion to quash the subpoena (or other formal objection filed in court) via email at legal-support@google.com no later than 5pm Pacific Time on October 11

see here

http://wblakegray.blogspot.com/2010/09/ ... ay-be.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

[David M. Bueker]

Ah the web - the best place for anonymous insults, and spreading them.

I doubt he will succeed, but it may be true that the web requires just a touch more decorum. Mr. Smith needs a haircut. He looks like Sideshow Bob from The Simpsons.

[James Roscoe]

Ah the web - the best place for anonymous insults, and spreading them.

I doubt he will succeed, but it may be true that the web requires just a touch more decorum. Mr. Smith needs a haircut. He looks like Sideshow Bob from The Simpsons.

Should you really talk about Robin that way?

Am I missing something here? Why do the lawyers think that Google would have anything to do with this case? Maybe if they had have asked Blake Gray's ISP, or Blogspot, what the person(s) IP addresses were then they might have more luck getting the information.

And speaking of Google, whatever happened to the case of Google Maps vs The Lady too stupid to know not to walk in front of a car on the highway?

Am I missing something here? Why do the lawyers think that Google would have anything to do with this case? Maybe if they had have asked Blake Gray's ISP, or Blogspot, what the person(s) IP addresses were then they might have more luck getting the information.

Pretty sure Blogspot is owned by Google.

Am I missing something here? Why do the lawyers think that Google would have anything to do with this case? Maybe if they had have asked Blake Gray's ISP, or Blogspot, what the person(s) IP addresses were then they might have more luck getting the information.

Pretty sure Blogspot is owned by Google.

OK, that would do it. Thanks Dale.

We can't let the terrorists win!!!!

Great story. I can agree with some of the folks who pointed out that the lawsuit only brings more eyeballs onto the blog and therefore informs more people of Mr. Smith's behavior at HdR. I certainly would never have heard of it if it weren't for Peter's post here, and that wouldn't have happened without the suit.

Smith strikes me as a really interesting guy, and really interesting guys can sometimes be very difficult. In my experience, if they're not too psycho to run a business, then knowing them is a net positive experience. Bottom line is that his wines seem to be out of my price range, but if he ever invites me for dinner you can bet I'm going!!

[Jenise]

Great story. I can agree with some of the folks who pointed out that the lawsuit only brings more eyeballs onto the blog and therefore informs more people of Mr. Smith's behavior at HdR. I certainly would never have heard of it if it weren't for Peter's post here, and that wouldn't have happened without the suit.

Smith strikes me as a really interesting guy, and really interesting guys can sometimes be very difficult. In my experience, if they're not too psycho to run a business, then knowing them is a net positive experience. Bottom line is that his wines seem to be out of my price range, but if he ever invites me for dinner you can bet I'm going!!

In Washington he's considered something of an idosyncratic wild man. I met him once at his winery during the Spring Barrel Tasting wherein he came over to talk to ask why I was outside playing with the cats instead of in the barn tasting wine. It was a short conversation.

[David M. Bueker]

In Washington he's considered something of an idosyncratic wild man.

I can't imagine why.

Sideshow Bob.jpg

therefore informs more people of Mr. Smith's behavior at HdR.

While I'm not a fan of lawsuit culture, it was hard not to read those reports without thinking "well there's someone out there with an absolute slamdunk case if she chose to sue for sexual harassment in the workplace"

Am I missing something here? Why do the lawyers think that Google would have anything to do with this case? Maybe if they had have asked Blake Gray's ISP, or Blogspot, what the person(s) IP addresses were then they might have more luck getting the information.

Pretty sure Blogspot is owned by Google.

In addition to Dale's answer, the unwritten rule is that you sue everybody and then drop them as a party later if necessary; this is a pretty standard practice.

[James Roscoe]

Am I missing something here? Why do the lawyers think that Google would have anything to do with this case? Maybe if they had have asked Blake Gray's ISP, or Blogspot, what the person(s) IP addresses were then they might have more luck getting the information.

Pretty sure Blogspot is owned by Google.

In addition to Dale's answer, the unwritten rule is that you sue everybody and then drop them as a party later if necessary; this is a pretty standard practice.

You mean if you can't squeeze money from the insurance company and the economics of the suit demand it. (i.e. the counter suit is going to cost more to defend than it's worth.)

When Jon says everybody, he means everybody up to and including God if feasible.