"Eric Schreiber" wrote in message
...
Rex Grigg wrote:

You really have to watch what you say and make sure you don't give
opinions anymore. I received this nice email this evening. Just a
heads up for all of you.

If they've really met with their attorney, maybe they could ask him to
write their letters for them in the future, as it's quite clear that
Carl Denzer lacks any substantial grammatical skills.

Seems to me it should/would be the lawyer's writing and sending the letter,
either way. And from my limited experience with litigation, they NEVER send
such notifications by email, but always through registered mail.

There's some BS going on here somewhere.

You make an interesting point. Yes, attorneys do generally write such
letters and send them registered. Sounds like someone in the company may
just be threatening to consult with attorneys, which costs $$$, and
self-drafted their own "cease and desist letter".

--
Bob Alston

bobalston9 AT aol DOT com
"Aardvark F. Bandersnatch, Esq." wrote in message
news:88Wvb.211663$9E1.1136430@attbi_s52...

"Eric Schreiber" wrote in message
...
Rex Grigg wrote:

You really have to watch what you say and make sure you don't give
opinions anymore. I received this nice email this evening. Just a
heads up for all of you.

If they've really met with their attorney, maybe they could ask him to
write their letters for them in the future, as it's quite clear that
Carl Denzer lacks any substantial grammatical skills.

Seems to me it should/would be the lawyer's writing and sending the
letter,
either way. And from my limited experience with litigation, they NEVER
send
such notifications by email, but always through registered mail.

There's some BS going on here somewhere.

tose (LeighMo) wrote in message ...
They claim to be based in Houston, but you certainly wouldn't know it
from their language skills.

Near as I can tell, they have their web site hosted with a company in Houston.
But if you look at their actual physical addresses (listed on their web site,
under "contacts"), they're all overseas, in places like Thailand, the Malta
Islands, Indonesia, Singapore, Portugal, etc. If they want to file a lawsuit
in the U.S., they're going to have to hire a lawyer. I think they'll find
American lawyers are a lot pricier than American webhosting.


Actually that means nothing. They can have business partners in Europe
or Asia. Its an American company based in Houston. Even if they are
part of a parent company overseas, they have an American office. They
are a member of the Houston Better Business bureau. They make
donations to Aquarium Societies all over the USA. If they have offices
all over the world, thats even scarier, that means they have the money
to sue. I am not defending them or attacking them here....all I am
saying is that the legal definition of slander would be in their
favor. If you bought their product and expressed dis satisfaction,
that would be different, but none of you have done that.

There is a well known name in the industry who markets products that I
have often heard people refer to as snake oil, but if people said that
publicaly on the internet, they would be crazy! Because they would get
sued and they would lose...most likely. Am I being over cautious?
Maybe I am, but I have good reason to be. The Pets whse thing IS
different. Complaining of bad service is not slander.

If you bought their product and expressed dis satisfaction,
that would be different, but none of you have done that.

All I said about them is their English sucks. It ain't slander because it's
true.

There is a well known name in the industry who markets products that I
have often heard people refer to as snake oil, but if people said that
publicaly on the internet, they would be crazy! Because they would get
sued and they would lose...most likely.

No, I don't think they would. You don't have to buy a perpetual motion machine
in order to prove it doesn't work. What usually happens is the thing PSW
counted on: people would rather shut up and or pay up than go to court.

Am I being over cautious?
Maybe I am, but I have good reason to be. The Pets whse thing IS
different. Complaining of bad service is not slander.

As I recall, you didn't want us speaking up about that, either.


Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

(Robert H) wrote:

If you bought their product and expressed dis satisfaction,
that would be different, but none of you have done that.

No, we've just pointed out that their marketing information sounds a
lot like psuedo-science (opinion), that their grammar skills are
horrible (true), and point out where NASA (to whom EcoAqualizer
attributes it's technology) has dismissed the alleged magical
properties of far infrared bioceramics.

The Pets whse thing IS different. Complaining of bad service is not
slander.

Not that it made a difference to the people who Novak sued.


--
www.ericschreiber.com

Yep,
But I believe it hurts a business a lot if they lose the court of
public opinion here on the net. Even if they can beat up on a few very
skeptical people with the law. One or two comments is one thing from a
poster, but if the person keeps posting nasty stuff about a company,
then the company should go after them some. Slander is not good and
should never be done.

But I will be critical of product even if I have not tried it if they
cannot
explain how/why it works. A business does not have the right to
surpress questioning and by ignoring the questions, they invite this
type of situation to arise. Again, they hang themselves by their own
rope. They created the issues, not the potential customer.

One or two post should certainly be ignored or be addressed on topic
about their claims by the company.

Last I checked, a sciencist cost less than a lawyer
And you will get much good will from them vs a lawyer(which no body
likes:-)

Regards,
Tom Barr


Chuck Gadd wrote in message . ..
On 22 Nov 2003 10:54:18 -0800,
) wrote:

Your selling something that requires this approach in sales
By not doing that, it makes the consumer both paranoid/suspicious and
also the mere fact that you threaten instead of discussing gives a
horrid taste in ANY consumer's mouth.

I definitely agree with this point. I have my opinion on the product
in question based on the pseudo-scientific descriptions, but what
makes me most skeptical is that rather than debate the science, they
consult lawyers. If there is solid science behind a product, then
that seems that discussing that science would be the best way to
response to critics.

If I was selling a product that WAS snake-oil, then my only way to
challenge critics would be thru a lawyer.


Chuck Gadd
http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua

tose (LeighMo) wrote:

They claim to be based in Houston, but you certainly wouldn't know it
from their language skills.

Near as I can tell, they have their web site hosted with a company in Houston.
But if you look at their actual physical addresses (listed on their web site,
under "contacts"), they're all overseas, in places like Thailand, the Malta
Islands, Indonesia, Singapore, Portugal, etc. If they want to file a lawsuit
in the U.S., they're going to have to hire a lawyer. I think they'll find
American lawyers are a lot pricier than American webhosting.

Careful, they could try you in the International Criminal Court which
is designed specifically as a kangaroo court for Americans.

tose (LeighMo) wrote in message ...
If you bought their product and expressed dis satisfaction,
that would be different, but none of you have done that.

All I said about them is their English sucks. It ain't slander because it's
true.

There is a well known name in the industry who markets products that I
have often heard people refer to as snake oil, but if people said that
publicaly on the internet, they would be crazy! Because they would get
sued and they would lose...most likely.

No, I don't think they would. You don't have to buy a perpetual motion machine
in order to prove it doesn't work. What usually happens is the thing PSW
counted on: people would rather shut up and or pay up than go to court.

Its gone way beyond that. Its not as simple as that. And they did not
go out of business, all they did was change their WEB address.



Am I being over cautious?
Maybe I am, but I have good reason to be. The Pets whse thing IS
different. Complaining of bad service is not slander.

As I recall, you didn't want us speaking up about that, either.

I don't know what you are reffering to, but obviously none of this is
getting thru to you. I'm not the enemy here. I'm not involved and I am
not the one threatening to sue.

Leigh, I don't really care what you say or what you do. Its your neck,
not mine. I'm just trying to give you a friendly little warning. More
power to you! Give them hell! Screw the consequences. BTW, I agree
with everything Tom said. Every word. It still doesn't change the
reality.

I don't know what you are reffering to, but obviously none of this is
getting thru to you. I'm not the enemy here. I'm not involved and I am
not the one threatening to sue.

Every time something like this comes up, you post warning us of the dire things
that can happen to us if we dare say bad things about businesses. If I were
the cynical type, I might think you were trying to discourage people from
dissing bad service or bad products because you are yourself a business person.
But luckily, I'm not, and I assume you are just overly concerned about our
welfare.

Well, we're all adults. Those of us who have been posting to this thread have
been following the PSW mess from the beginning. We know the risks we are
taking by speaking out. We know them all too well. Obviously, if we're still
speaking out, we've made some decisions about freedom of speech vs. risk of
lawsuits. Trust us to make our own decisions, okay?

Slobodan Milosevic is American?!? Funny, he
doesn't sound American--Maybe it's just a
Canadian accent or something...

-coelacanth

"Squidvark" wrote in message
...
tose (LeighMo) wrote:

They claim to be based in Houston, but you certainly wouldn't know it
from their language skills.

Near as I can tell, they have their web site hosted with a company in
Houston.
But if you look at their actual physical addresses (listed on their web
site,
under "contacts"), they're all overseas, in places like Thailand, the
Malta
Islands, Indonesia, Singapore, Portugal, etc. If they want to file a
lawsuit
in the U.S., they're going to have to hire a lawyer. I think they'll
find
American lawyers are a lot pricier than American webhosting.

Careful, they could try you in the International Criminal Court which
is designed specifically as a kangaroo court for Americans.

(Robert H) wrote in message . com...
I did a search on the product in Google and came up with lots of
stuff..(never saw Rexs comments, but lots of talk about the product in
lots and lots of forums) There was plenty of sketicisim both in
freshwater and Marine forums, but not all negative. They do have their
supporters. FAMA magazine wrote a very positive review of it, and
Monolith Marine Monsters, M3, is not only seling the product, but
gives much detailed information about how it works and the science
behind it. M3 has long had a reputation of selling only high quality
specialty equipment. Many of you have their C02 equipment and swear by
them. Even with past troubles, M3s reputation for its product line has
been sterling, (much to my dismay!)
http://www.marine-monsters.com/front...aqualizer.html
There are other very well respected dealers putting their reputation
on the line by selling this product.

I was very disappointed in the FAMA review, and I'm frankly surprised
that FAMA printed it. How often do you read a product review in which
the reviewed hasn't used the product? Not once did the reviewed relate
any personal experiences. There was no before-and-after water quality
test results. It was just a "I love the theory behind this product!"
lovefest rave. Far below FAMA's usual quality.

Similarly, M3 doesn't give any new information on how it works, it's
just a rehash of the Eco-Aqualizer website. M3 doesn't actually say
they use the product themselves.

I have yet to find anyone who has actually used the product and
reported a good experience. All of the supporters seem to be people
who haven't actually tried it, or at least aren't reporting any
specific results.

If anyone knows of positive reviews written by people who have
actually used the Eco-Aqualizer, pleaes let me know.

- Jim

tose (LeighMo) wrote in message ...

Well, we're all adults. Those of us who have been posting to this thread have
been following the PSW mess from the beginning. We know the risks we are
taking by speaking out. We know them all too well. Obviously, if we're still
speaking out, we've made some decisions about freedom of speech vs. risk of
lawsuits. Trust us to make our own decisions, okay?


Absolutly not!This est Amerika!

Just follow the law(Not Bob's law), speak your mind, speak the truth.

Tag these companies for the issues, not explaining their unexplainable
crystal water methods that solve water changes for 8 months with no
export of waste, emissions of radition but no electric plug, etc.
I saw a compnay that claimed the crystals will cure just about any and
everything, just drop it in the tank.

I have gone after some products in the past over the principles they
claim.
But they will engauge in discussion about them. If not they have no
right to come back with a lawyer later but legally they can. Doesn't
mean it's right or will help them at all in the end.

Lawyers are for people who cannot get along.

You can remove the post but you cannot remove the doubt and the lack
of explaination nor the general suspicion this approach of theirs
imparts to the netizens of the web.

Thuis is were this guy blew it, he could not address the consumer's
questions tactifully.

They think they can pawn off some crap references that many times are
not applicable to the situation they want to back their claims up
with.

How stupid do you think people are?
I find it insulting. Then they threaten you on top of it.

But do not slander them. They do not deserve that, they do deserve
critical discussion if they do not play ball with the consumer.

This company will lose their already very questionable good will with
this approach of silencing individual aquarist on the net.
We all know this to well from another case.

Business is just not done this way and you simply cannot sell anything
with this attitude on the net.

The customer is always right.
Some block heads just don't get it.

But just keep pounding these rat *******s on the issues and stay on
topic, do not take it personally, do not slander or break laws(this is
were you have potential for trouble), but keep asking them to prove
their claims.

Show some good debating skills.

They cannot threaten you for asking questions.
Just stay on topic, discuss how on earth all this energy is able to
come out of these biocermic doohickys for 21 years and coon's life.
How would this change anything vs a larger skimmer or O3 etc. Let's
see some water quality data and some sources of export of these waste.

Cat got their tongue?
Keep posting and questioning them.
All those unanswered questions will build up on those search engines
and folks wanting to take a look will see the opinions about how this
company handled their business froma consumer's viewpoint.

It's pretty darn poor from all accounts thus far.

The future is up to the company, it'll only get worse going the
direction they are now.

Regards,
Tom Barr

In article ,
"coelacanth" wrote:

Slobodan Milosevic is American?!? Funny, he
doesn't sound American--Maybe it's just a
Canadian accent or something...

-coelacanth


Slobo wasn't tried in the ICC. He was tried in the special Yugoslav war
crimes court established by special action specifically for the purpose.
The lack of such a clear mandate is one (of many) problem with the ICC.

On topic: There's no way the email quoted was written by a member of the
bar in the US. Just as the Eco-aq*lizer material is gobbledygook, that
email is also such rubbish that would ensure the person writing it was
never even admitted to law school. Unless the OP gets a real notice by
registered mail, I say bang away.

B

--
Brian Heller

It is easier to tame wild beasts
than to conquer the human mind.

The good doctors run a great operation

I agree. I order from them every few months.


Chuck Gadd
http://www.csd.net/~cgadd/aqua

Just follow the law(Not Bob's law), speak your mind, speak the truth.

Tom it was your attorney friend, and fellow defendant Steve Dixon who
told me calling a product "snake oil" is slander and is against the
law. But you are right, you are all adults and make your own choices.
And even if you are in the right, its worth going thru two or three
years of hell. Sure.