Parking Eye - "take down" request

HO87

Second most popular search of "Parking Eye" on Google is "Parking Eye Scam". Some might think that that said it all when considering the existing reputation of the company.

anewman

Any web host which actually reads take down requests will usually just take stuff down regardless of the content, for fear of litigation on them (even though it is legally the site owner's responsibility for the content, even if the content was posted by someone else, for example on a forum). The same type of issues come up with Paypal and Ebay, they respond to complaints but don't put much brain effort into it, just following a quick rule book which often gets it wrong. It seems that Parking Eye know this and are taking advantage of it. Looking at Google it seems they're losing the battle and should just give up IMO. They've already shown how making the effort can make things ten times worse

DontPayThePPCs

Have been watching this with interest.

Blog has also been copied onto the "You don't have to pay private parking tickets" Facebook page.

What is strange, is that there is nothing on the blog in question that has not been said a hundred times before.

Governments the world over cannot control the spread of information on the net, so I fail to see how a private company could have any hope of doing so.

Spartacus_Mills

hillcats wrote: »

Do you know what?
I think I can see what the problem is here...

THE TRUTH HURTS AND THEY DON'T LIKE IT !

Exactly. There is a perfect defence in law against any charges of defamation and that being that what you are saying is true. All the OP would have to do would be to demonstrate what they were saying was true and case thrown out.

Mosh

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

All the OP would have to do would be to demonstrate what they were saying was true and case thrown out.

Which sadly involves going to court using lawyers I can't afford... and by the time it got there, my blog would already have been taken offline by my frightened hosts.

HO87

Easily said by those not at the receiving and of a threat but don't give up hope yet. Taking up one of the offers you already have (from another forum) to host the blog offshore will leave M Law and their illustrious clients "wi' nowt to do but bang theer gums". I really can't understand what the purpose of this action is unless their target is really PePiPoo who, some while ago, changed their policy with regard to way advice was formulated for PPC cases and may thus have shown a chink in their armour.

Mosh

Well, the original post will - this evening - be replaced at the same URL with links to the material on PePiPoo, here and my friend's US blog. As well as an explanation of why it was removed.

Currently, the original post has gone past 400 views, the one on here past 265 and my friend's blog traffic has trebled.

Can anyone say "own goal"?

HO87

As the situation has worsened considerably I think it would only be appropriate that MLaw are made aware. Better still, tell their clients. Second thoughts, its pretty certain that they will already have noticed. As another suggestion you could add a vote to the thread on PePiPoo as a means of gauging how many people believe that MLaw's clients have been defamed.

Mosh

I'll mention it in the replacement blog post I'm about to write. I'm sure they'll be checking it tomorrow to ensure it's been removed!

Mosh

New post up - same URL as before: http://j.mp/bdZzVH. Let's see if I get a take-down order for that. I've also emailed One&One complaining about their poor service and that I feel I have been libelled by M Law as they *stated* that I had defamed their client.