"If anything goes wrong with my whitebox build, I'll sue!"

[VirtualLarry]

http://www.newegg.com/Info/Testimonials.aspx

Thank You - Ya made my Christmas
Budgie , 12/15/2016 1:24:32 PM
Clean and simple - During the 2016 Black Friday sale I ordered all the components needed for my new build.
Everything arrived within four days and although the shipping boxes (three) showed signs of rough treatment (tears, rips, crushing) by the carrier all components were so well packed that no damage was visible to the component's packages.
I used a local firm to build the unit (if anything went wrong I could sue them - verus - not being able to sue myself for cluster disasters) .
Anyways everything you provided is working perfectly.
So excellent prices, excellent delivery, everything in mint condition!

- to paraphrase! - I'LL BE BACK

Freaking customers... no, thankfully not mine. But... "hey, let's use this whitebox guy. If anything goes wrong, I'll just sue 'em!"

 

[UsandThem]

Yeah, there are quite a few reviews/testimonials I've read on Newegg where I picture them to have the social skills of J.P. in 'Grandma's Boy':

I also saw an article where a Russian immigrant in Indiana buys used computer hardware, claims it doesn't work, and then sues the person for insane amounts of money using "consumer protection" laws. He doesn't work, he just scours Craigslist / newspapers looking for people selling stuff so he can turn around and sue them. In this case, he bought a $40 used printer and ended up getting awarded $30k:

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/...-printer-then-he-sued-indiana-30000/85219140/

 

[Torn Mind]

Yeah, there are quite a few reviews/testimonials I've read on Newegg where I picture them to have the social skills of J.P. in 'Grandma's Boy':



I also saw an article where a Russian immigrant in Indiana buys used computer hardware, claims it doesn't work, and then sues the person for insane amounts of money using "consumer protection" laws. He doesn't work, he just scours Craigslist / newspapers looking for people selling stuff so he can turn around and sue them. In this case, he bought a $40 used printer and ended up getting awarded $30k:

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/...-printer-then-he-sued-indiana-30000/85219140/

He's Ukranian.

Kinda of strange that mail didn't arrive in any way. That makes me suspect that it was stolen or the defendant was neglectful of writing a response and concocted an excuse for not paying attention. Or, Indiana needs to reform their rules so that proper proof of delivery (certified mail) is used in such cases.

Anyway, the Ukranian and that Clements guy are real pieces of work. It's a godforsaken used product that costs 40 dollars and he tossed it(the evidence) in the trash.

 

[UsandThem]

He's Ukranian.

Kinda of strange that mail didn't arrive in any way. That makes me suspect that it was stolen or the defendant was neglectful of writing a response and concocted an excuse for not paying attention. Or, Indiana needs to reform their rules so that proper proof of delivery (certified mail) is used in such cases.

Anyway, the Ukranian and that Clements guy are real pieces of work. It's a godforsaken used product that costs 40 dollars and he tossed it(the evidence) in the trash.

I hadn't heard much about him since I first saw the story, but a link in the first one I posted had an updated 2014 story about him dealing with the Indiana Supreme Court, and it appears they finally have had enough of him:

An Indianapolis man who has filed more than 120 lawsuits since 2008 got a stern message this week from the Indiana Supreme Court; Enough's enough, the justices told Gersh Zavodnik

Court records show Zavodnik has filed at least 123 civil lawsuits in Marion and surrounding counties since 2008. Most revolve around Internet sales and purchases gone bad

Zavodnik could face fines, criminal charges or a prohibition on filing new lawsuits unless he is in "immediate danger of bodily injury," the justices warned.

 

[Valantar]

...and that's why the US legal system is completely bonkers. Not because of the opportunity to sue, but the simple fact that there is no relation whatsoever between "harm done" and awarded damages. Not to mention that the courts can deem you culpable for absolutely bonkers stuff like someone tripping on the pavement in your driveway.

The only sane court decision in a (theoretical) case like this would be: the whitebox builder gets time to RMA whatever broke (if applicable), if not, replaces the part at own cost - and the plaintiff covers the court fees, as this is so f*cking obviously the only way this should work that the judge should hand them their asses and then some. A fine for wasting the court's time would be fine too. Possibly a contempt charge.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

http://www.newegg.com/Info/Testimonials.aspx

Freaking customers... no, thankfully not mine. But... "hey, let's use this whitebox guy. If anything goes wrong, I'll just sue 'em!"

Simple answer. Don't build systems for other people. Especially not with parts they brought to you.

 

[Torn Mind]

...and that's why the US legal system is completely bonkers. Not because of the opportunity to sue, but the simple fact that there is no relation whatsoever between "harm done" and awarded damages. Not to mention that the courts can deem you culpable for absolutely bonkers stuff like someone tripping on the pavement in your driveway.

The only sane court decision in a (theoretical) case like this would be: the whitebox builder gets time to RMA whatever broke (if applicable), if not, replaces the part at own cost - and the plaintiff covers the court fees, as this is so f*cking obviously the only way this should work that the judge should hand them their asses and then some. A fine for wasting the court's time would be fine too. Possibly a contempt charge.

You should chill on the US bashing and perhaps address the specific matter that cost this guy 12,000 and an attorney.
This is not a case that went to the Federal Government. This is specific to the state of Indiana itself. In particular, the need to respond with an admission or rejection, the circumstances in which "victim" did not respond promptly and how that went through the court. This way of operation is not prevalent in all states. The original small claims was tossed out and he would have been fine in probably any other state.

 

[Valantar]

You should chill on the US bashing and perhaps address the specific matter that cost this guy 12,000 and an attorney.
This is not a case that went to the Federal Government. This is specific to the state of Indiana itself. In particular, the need to respond with an admission or rejection, the circumstances in which "victim" did not respond promptly and how that went through the court. This way of operation is not prevalent in all states. The original small claims was tossed out and he would have been fine in probably any other state.

But the thread wasn't about that guy, nor about Indiana. I responded to what - from my perspective - is the overly litigative culture of the US - which from my perspective was very relevant as that comment truly blew me away with its complete disregard for the legal system. It's not US-bashing, it's social commentary. A judicial system should really not work like that. (And of course I understand that the vast majority of frivolous and silly lawsuits get tossed out, and that only the worst cases reach the media. There's still a reason why the US is the only country you see stuff like this from.) I'll gladly comment just as critically on the Norwegian legal system, which has abundant flaws of its own, but that's not really relevant in this thread. Having lived both places does give some perspective, though.

 

[Kaido]

Freaking customers... no, thankfully not mine. But... "hey, let's use this whitebox guy. If anything goes wrong, I'll just sue 'em!"

One of the big reasons I work for corporations & not individuals these days. Too many crazies. Downside is the nutjobs usually pay pretty well because everyone else steers clear of them!

 

[Red Squirrel]

This type of mentality is a big part of what is wrong with the world, and the legal system. People should not be able to sue for this kind of stuff in first place. It seems the biggest risk of doing business these days is lawsuits. That's just ridiculous. The law system, especially lawsuits, needs to be revamped so that these type of lawsuits arn't even passed.

Then there's the whole liability stuff these days, that kinda falls into the same issue, the fact that you can sue for anything. That needs to stop. This is literally why we can't have nice things. "Why can't they do XYZ?" "If something goes wrong...". Ex: grocery stores donating "expired" food to the poor. Can't do that... if someone gets sick they get sued. So instead it's better to just waste it all.

 

[Exterous]

You should chill on the US bashing and perhaps address the specific matter that cost this guy 12,000 and an attorney.

He's not wrong about the issues with the US legal system. Its expensive to get sued even if you never go to court but people shell out hoards of cash for defense because damages often have no basis in reality and will crush you if you lose. Even if you win you can still lose

Even winning is expensive. Blitz beat one lawsuit in Texas, Marketplace reports, but the fight still cost the company about $2.5 million.

https://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahom...f-portable-gas-cans-is-going-out-of-business/

 

[Red Squirrel]

Yep only the one that sues wins, and that's a huge problem with the system. There needs to be a filtering process for lawsuits, and it needs to be rather thorough. If a lawsuit is filed and does not pass the filter the one who is suing should have to pay a processing fee. The victim is in no way involved in this process. Perhaps they would be notified that someone tried to sue them and failed, but that's it. If it passes a basic filter, there should be a secondary filter stage, but with experts on the subject brought in. For example let's take the Yahoo hack as an example. If someone was suing Yahoo the first filter could determine if there was intent of harm, or gross negligence. Gross negligence could be ruled as their security should have prevented the hack. The secondary filter would involve infosec people to oversee their infrastructure and nature of the hack. At this point the victim, Yahoo would be involved to shed more details such as what security measures they had in place. If they used proper hashing schemes and had decent security, perhaps the lawsuit is void, as a "shit happens" clause. But if they are found to have been using unsalted MD5 or something like that, then the lawsuit is ruled valid, and proceeds. Perhaps more experts are brought in to act as a jury, to get into more specific details. Or at least, some kind of process like that. Idea is, the victim should not have to waste their time unless it's a valid lawsuit. Another thing, if they win, the one who was suing should also have to pay their legal fees, and perhaps even more money to them.

The amount someone is sued for should also be determined by the judge/jury and not the person suing. It should be based on actual damages caused by, or severity of the crime/action. You should not be able to sue a mom and pop burger shop for 1 billion because they forgot to put cheese in your burger. With the current system, you actually can and the victory is determined by whoever has the best lawyer. Either way the mom and pop shop is going to be losing hundreds of thousands of dollars even if they win.