In my Friday round-up I briefly wrote about the lame attempt of the Dozier law firm to claim copyright infringement if any part of their cease and desist letter was published. Public Citizen had published the letter on behalf of the recipient, as fair use, and challenged Dozier to sue them. I followed up with a fuller post on Tuesday (Don’t Post This Letter On The Internet!). While not what I usually write about, the sheer audacity of it caught my interest.
As a result of Dozier’s claim of a copyright infringement for publishing any part of their cease and desist letters, The Streisand Effect seems to be taking hold, and others are now writing on the issue. Additional links follow, of which the first, by leading copyright attorney William Patry, is particularly enlightening on how he thinks Dozier misused the copyright claim in their letter:
- Misuse via Cease and Desist Letters (The Patry Copyright Blog);
- More DirectBuy Complaints (before they hired Dozier Internet Law) (tdaxp.com)
But rather than let the issue fade away, as I think would have been wise, Dozier has now published more on the subject at their own website here, as well as by making nasty remarks in the comments section here. Those comments first acknowledged that they had no U.S. authority for their position and then sought to change the subject by saying a personal injury attorney should keep his nose out of this. Blaming the messenger, while a fairly old and traditional tactic for distraction, obviously ignores the issue.
The publication of the new letter by Dozier will, of course, lead to yet more discussion not only of the issue, but of their client DirectBuy and the original allegations that the company was a scam. It was those allegations Dozier had apparently been trying to squash. Here is the first I have seen in response to that new letter, though I suspect other responses may follow:
I can only think of two reasons for Dozier to publish such a letter on their site: The first is sheer folly, since it draws yet more attention to the charges against the company they wish to defend.
The second is more troublesome. Is Dozier simply trying to create more controversy, and thus more links to their website and hopefully more business? That will surely be one result of publishing a letter to Public Citizen on their website instead of reaching out to them privately. But this would also raise very troubling issues regarding attorney ethics and legal malpractice since this is seems to me clearly detrimental to their client. I prefer the first explanation — that it is sheer folly and not an ethical breach — though a savvy Internet based business must surely anticipate the repercussions to their client of additional commentary on the subject.
In either case, I think a legal malpractice claim could theoretically be made against Dozier for taking a bad situation and making it worse, in the event DirectBuy is harmed by their counsel’s conduct. But only time will tell on that.
Links to this post:
2007 dozier internet law google rankings – week 7
dozier continues to throw cash at spam advertising — doorway pages, theory pants, and the rest — in order to prevent googlers from finding out information about the company. still, the fact that some of the spam pages are very, …posted by [email protected] (Dan tdaxp) @ November 28, 2007 12:00 PM
2007 dozier internet law google rankings – week 6
2007 dozier internet law google rankings – week 6. its hard to find much good to say about dozier internet law. no, seriously. my blog dedicated to the company’s cases, dozier internet lawsuits, is stalled because i can only find one …posted by [email protected] (Dan tdaxp) @ November 21, 2007 12:33 PM
More unethical behavior from Dozier Internet Law
Sadly my attention has been drawn away from the Dozier Internet Law vs The Free World battle online, and as a result seeing my Google ranking drop a bit over the last 5 weeks (weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) for related queries I decided I needed …posted by Brendan @ November 21, 2007 1:35 AM
2007 dozier internet law google rankings – week 5
this week’s poll, like most bcs weekly polls this year, is anything but stable. five pages dropped out of the top 15, including 3 of the top 15, and including — #2 ranked cybertriallawyer.com. while dozier’s main page is still #1, …posted by [email protected] (Dan tdaxp) @ November 14, 2007 10:54 AM
2007 dozier internet law google rankings – week 4
this week’s poll is a tale of stability. of the top 10 entry, only two are not holds. the biggest gainer is plagiarism today, which is apparently enjoying the popularity of a mention on writing thoughts. “pt” jumps 7 points to #6, …posted by [email protected] (Dan tdaxp) @ November 07, 2007 7:53 AM
2007 dozier internet law google rankings – week 3
this weeks poll includes the story of an upset worthy of boston college. after seeing their findlaw entry fall a point and a press release fall out of the top 25 midweek, dozier rallied to maintain the status quo by beginning of morning …posted by [email protected] (Dan tdaxp) @ October 31, 2007 4:21 PM
dozier: the cybertrolllawyer firm
a magyar “internetjogászokról” szoktam rendszeresen szépeket irogatni ide, de közel sem magyar sajátosságról van szó. külföldön is megjelentek már egy ideje az internetspecialisták, akiknek sokszor lövésük sincs az egészről. …posted by Caracalla @ October 19, 2007 3:02 PM
practical blawgosphere: the dozier demand scam
while this has floated around blawgs as the joke of the week, i wanted to make sure that my amigos in the practical blawgosphere were alerted to the dozier demand scam, as noted by my good buddies, the turk at new york personal injury …posted by SHG @ October 14, 2007 4:45 AM
Dozier Internet Law: Running an extortion racket?
When thinking about the ongoing dispute over the unprofessional actions of Dozier Internet Law… I think back to an old Monty Python episode and the the army protection racket sketch: Dino: Oh see my brother’s clumsy colonel, …posted by Brendan @ October 13, 2007 1:49 AM
law firm web sites, links and legal malpractice
we read a blog blurb from eric turkowitz at his new york personal injury blog which caught our eye and interest. he discusses a unique warning letter by the dozier internet law firm, and the potential legal malpractice consequences. …posted by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone @ October 12, 2007 8:14 AM
nastygram: don’t you dare post this nastygram on the web
ted has briefly mentioned (oct. 8) the recent doings of an outfit called dozier internet law, whose cease and desist letter to a consumer-complaint site not only demanded that the site take down certain statements about dozier’s client, …posted by @ October 12, 2007 1:06 AM
dozier reponds
our post about dozier internet law’s cease-and-desist letter to a consumer-review site, which threatened a copyright infringement claim if the letter were posted on the internet, generated a lot of commentary on this blog and around the …posted by Greg Beck @ October 11, 2007 6:19 PM
lawfare and public participation (does dozier know better? should it?)
posted by dan tdaxp. i am confused. what happened at first at least made sense. three blogs (i-blog, i-ratings, i-scams) criticize directbuy. directbuy hires a lawyer, dozier internet law. a lawyer sends a threatening letter (excerpts, …posted by @ October 11, 2007 12:52 PM
lawfare and public participation (does dozier know better? should it?)
posted by dan tdaxp. i am confused. what happened at first at least made sense. three blogs (i-blog, i-ratings, i-scams) criticize directbuy. directbuy hires a lawyer, dozier internet law. a lawyer sends a threatening letter (excerpts, …posted by @ October 11, 2007 12:52 PM
