|
#501
|
|||
|
|||
This is pretty mind boggling. Its a serialized card, where it is described as having issues present in 2006, that are no longer there.
|
#502
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
As for Blowout, the owner folded in the face of an obvious bluff. They should have told whoever sent the demand letter to go f^< k themselves. A case against Blowout for something a poster wrote has no merit because Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act gives interactive online services of all types broad immunity from defamation claims stemming from content created by others: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." The threat is so lacking in legal justification that after the lawsuit is thrown out of Federal court, BO could sue the attorney stupid enough to file the case for malicious prosecution. In state courts in Cali and some other states with anti-SLAPP laws (laws that punish the use of frivolous lawsuits to stifle debates about issues relevant to a segment of the public), the case would be disposed of in the initial pleading stages as well, with sanctions against the plaintiff for bringing it in the first place. All BO has now done is to geld the board: anyone who is angry at anything posted just needs to send a lawyer letter and it will be censored.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true. https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/ Or not... |
#503
|
||||
|
||||
I have gotten many Cease And Desist letters. Almost all of them I just laugh at. Since lawyers started understanding what Section 230 does (defines who a publisher of information is) they mostly quit. And of course a forum owner is not liable for what a member says, so I never have had a concern. I can even edit someone's post, and as long as I don't change the meaning, I am still not liable. I have told a few lawyers to go read 230, F off and get back to me. None ever did.
Quote:
__________________
Leon Luckey |
#504
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#505
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Actually a nice little jab BO did to PWCC, BGS, and the card owner. |
#506
|
|||
|
|||
Has the FBI officially closed this case?
|
#507
|
||||
|
||||
|
#508
|
||||
|
||||
Not sure, their lawyer did an excellent job of making the whole thing disappear. Like posters on his forum.
|
#509
|
||||
|
||||
If the FBI thinks that issuing a few random refunds exonerates PWCC and PSA from the fraud they committed, that's really sad.
Hopefully they realize that 99% of the altered cards sold have not been refunded, and that the vast majority are still circulating among countless dealers/auction houses/collectors. |
#510
|
||||
|
||||
Fbi
Quote:
__________________
Frank Evanov Last edited by mantlefan; 09-28-2020 at 05:16 PM. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What Brent Huigens' mindset TRULY is during this scandal | sportscardtheory | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 53 | 06-06-2019 07:38 AM |
Brent Huigens - PWCC. Do you really want to keep this game up? I'm ready boss. | Whodunit | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 246 | 07-02-2018 05:52 AM |
ebay - criminal intent (a little off topic) | sports-rings | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 37 | 01-27-2014 05:57 AM |
Pennsylvania Attorney needed for Collector | prewarsports | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 11-22-2013 07:46 AM |
OT: Criminal embezzles to buy forged autographs | tazdmb | Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports | 25 | 09-20-2013 09:44 AM |