Quixtar "Diamonds" Joe and Lynne Land File Suit Against Site Owner
October 22, 2002
On June 26, 2002, a suit was filed against Scott Larsen in US District Court. Larsen is the owner of the website, Quixtar Amway Business Analysis (formerly Amway Distributor's Little White Lies).
The complaint comes from Joe and Lynn Land, as well as their companies, Land Group International and AllianceNet Solutions, LLC. They allege that Larsen posted false and defamatory statements and misrepresentations about them and their "successful Quixtar business;" and that he infringed on their copyrights. They also accuse him of violating the Lanham Act and the South Carolina Fair Trade Practices Act, and interfering with contractual relations, both prospective and actual.
Attached to their complaint are various exhibits which were filed to help substantiate the Lands' claim against Larsen.
So what is all this "false," "defamatory," and other information which Larsen posted on his site?
- An email from a site visitor about the Lands. Larsen routinely posts these, unedited, on his site. Viewpoints range from extremely critical of Amway/Quixtar to extremely enthusiastic about them.
- Some quotes from a tape of an Open Meeting presented by Mr. Land, and analysis of same.
- An announcement that Land had his house (apparently owned before he got involved with Am/Quix) on the market, with a link to the listing.
- An announcement that Land had split from his upline and started his own motivational business, AllianceNet Solutions.
- Taped statements from Land that selling is not necessary as a Quixtar IBO, and the claim that he does not sell.
- A copy of information from Land's website which describes the "system" which is "necessary" for success.
- Copies of email correspondence (mostly about lawsuits involving the Amway/Quixtar motivational tools) between Larsen and the Lands.
- Copies of some pages from the Lands' website.
Most of this is pretty understandable and straight forward. However, I admit to some confusion.
South Carolina Fair Trade Practices Act deals with business relationships, defined as:
" 'Trade' and 'commerce' shall include the advertising, offering for sale, sale or distribution of any services and any property, tangible or intangible, real, personal or mixed, and any other article, commodity or thing of value wherever situate, and shall include any trade or commerce directly or indirectly affecting the people of this State. "
Section 39-5-20 (a) declares that:
"Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful."
Of course, I'm not a lawyer, but I fail to see how an opinion of a private individual who is not engaged in business can constitute an "unfair trade practice." Additionally, this law requires that the unfair trade practice be against the public interest. Perhaps some of you legal beagles reading this could enlighten me.
Lanham Act Violations. I have to admit equal confusion regarding the accusations of Lanham Act violations. The section of the Act referred to deals with trademark violations, and refers to a false statement which:
- "is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or
- "in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities."
Copyright Violations. Copyright law contains a Fair Use provision, which allows for copyrighted material to be used for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, without infringing.
The real question, though, is whether there are real issues here, or is this just the latest in a line of Amway/Quixtar or their Motivational Organizations' attempts to silence their critics?
Anyway, enough preamble. I am very interested in this case, and will let you know what's in the public record as it develops.