GreenZap Seeks to Zap Uncomplimentary Bloggers with Suits
Online payment company GreenZap wants $57.5 million in damages and an injunction against allegedly defamatory bloggers and their Web hosts. GreenZap filed suit Tues. against blog GreenZapScam.com, and Web hosts Liquid Web and Vodien. The suit is the “first of many” the PayPal provider is preparing against bloggers and hosting companies that damaged GreenZap’s reputation, GreenZap said. The blogs created a “cloud of mistrust” that GreenZap has been forced to deal with daily with consumers and strategic partners, GreenZap Vp Linda Murphy said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
GreenZapScam.com called GreenZap “crap,” “a scam” and a “hare-brained scheme,” the suit said. GreenZapScam.com blogged that GreenZap encourages its members to steal money and that GreenZap forged its members’ checks and tried to cash them, the suit said. GreenZap suffered loss of reputation, shame, mortification and hurt feelings from the statements, the suit said. It also said the domain name GreenZapScam.com infringes its trademark. GreenZap is seeking relief on theories of unfair business practices, trade libel, trademark infringement, intentional and negligent interference with contractual relationship, and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage.
GreenZap sent letters to the bloggers but received “malicious attacks” in response, Murphy said. GreenZap said Liquid Web declined to shut down GreenZapScam.com, and Singapore-based Vodien, which owns the website, ignored GreenZap’s requests altogether. GreenZap also identified several individual bloggers who posted the content and intends to add them to the action, it said. Vodien said it’s unfamiliar with GreenZap, hasn’t been contacted by GreenZap, and isn’t aware of any lawsuit. LiquidWeb declined to comment.
Mich.-based Liquid Web filed a motion Jan. 25 to be dismissed from the case, saying GreenZap didn’t establish jurisdiction for the court in the Southern Dist. of Cal. Liquid Web also said it was protected by the Communications Decency Act, which protects hosting companies from liability for content posted by a 3rd-party client. And GreenZap failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, Liquid Web said. - Adam Bender