News: Flippa template seller type conman jailed for four years

[Rover]

Suppose I have a huge network of high quality backlinks. My business model is to sell sites, then, in about six months to one year, I take off most of the best backlinks and leave the rest. In that way, I can continually reuse backlinks.

In some cases, I use those links to build up my own competing sites in the same niche that I just sold the site in.

I know that the persons site will tank, but when I typically sell a site, the buyer knows little about the linking process. I tell them that there is no guarantee that the site will stay in the top ranked position. I do however try and give them some false hopes.

Suppose I sell a couple of 300k sites per week and do it for several years. Is there anything that can legally come back to bite me. I mean it says everywhere that there are no guaranteed Google rankings. In addition, the people buying don't normally even ask about the backlinks.

Here's the bottom line, I know the site is going to tank, but they don't. Is it their own problem that they don't get it? Do I have to tell them about the linking process and how SEO works.

Further, if this is illegal, how do you get a lawyer to take your case when you don't have any money? For example, if I just put out 300k for a site and that was my savings, How do I now go after the multi millionaire who screwed me.

Finally, if this has happened to lots of people, how do you do a class action law suit? For example, if you post on the internet the company or peoples names, then they will sue you for slander and threaten you.

Can I build a site to encourage people to come forth and name the people and the companies that are involved or will this get me knocked off and/or sued?

Edit: You can't make a post with [html] tags - Clinton

[Clinton]

Rover, I modified your html tags to the quote tags, but I take it this is not a quote you've copied from elsewhere (such a long quote could be considered copyright infringement).

How do you get a lawyer to take your case when you don't have money? I'm sorry, but this is not anybody else's problem. If such an investor put in every last cent and can't afford legal action why did he bother to sign a contract with the seller? A contract is meaningless if you aren't prepared (and able) to act to enforce it.

If you post people's names they can sue you and may even win. Slander and libel are tricky beasts and implemented very differently in different parts of the world. As you know I've had some experience with defending free speech on this forum and have had to take legal advice. However, I am sure there are ways you can word it so you use people's names without calling them thieves or suggesting they did something illegal.

Can I build a site to encourage people to come forth and name the people and the companies that are involved or will this get me knocked off and/or sued?

Sure you can. These forums did

If you are trying to publicly humiliate a party, damage his business or encourage people to bad mouth him on the internet your site will quickly run into trouble. If you're encouraging people to contact you privately so you can form a group and take action ...I don't see what's illegal about that. In fact, I could pass your URL to one or two people who I know feel the same way you do.

[Kay]

If you are trying to publicly humiliate a party, damage his business or encourage people to bad mouth him on the internet your site will quickly run into trouble.

A pal of mine has recently had his competitor bad mouthing him on Twitter. My friend ignored it, but there are also other issues at stake where the competitor is accusing him of [can't say here] and a legal battle is now underway. I've seen the correspondence but don't recall the Twitter incident being mentioned - could be more ammo.

Also a major company really p*ssed me off a few years ago so I built a xyzsucks type of site. I had to go for the co.uk as I couldn't get the .com. Funnily enough, the .com was owned by their major competitor (another huge corporation). I took the attitude that it can't be libel if it's true. Also that I am entitled to my opinion that the company sucks.

Erk, I just know you're going to tell me to tread more carefully.

[Clinton]

The #1 successful defence to libel is "truth". The other is "opinion".

You can get into serious trouble for what you say on Twitter.

[mgallone]

Also a major company really p*ssed me off a few years ago so I built a xyzsucks type of site. I had to go for the co.uk as I couldn't get the .com. Funnily enough, the .com was owned by their major competitor (another huge corporation).

I saw an article on this recently (can't remember where), which mentioned that a lot of companynamesucks.com type websites are actually being bought by the companies in question. Whilst many of these are left dormant, the article suggested and gave examples of some companies which actually develop sites and encourage feedback from customers in an attempt to improve their product and customer satisfaction. Personally, I think this is a great idea and a very good way in which to engage with your customer base and get some pointers as to where you're going wrong/how you can improve.

[Clinton]

experienced-people-sucks.net is still available

[Kay]

LOL!

About getting into trouble for what you say on Twitter, I wonder what extent you can get away with the "I was only joking" defence - it obviously didn't work in that case.

What's a joke or funny is extremely subjective anyway. Personally I don't find threatening to blow up an airport funny at all. And in today's environment of fear, paranoia even, of terrorism, it was an extremely ill-judged remark to make. People ought to think before they tweet.

@mgallone - sounds like a great idea re the company buying the sucks version. I would sell my little sucks site to the company if they paid me enough. Then I'd feel like I'd got back the money they cheated me out of and I wouldn't hate them so much.

[midascode]

Thanks for the links Clinton - I must have had my head under a stone because I had not seen this one. I was wondering exactly how they convicted him because as someone else pointed out - it is not illegal to over charge for a website - but credit to the authorities for making the fraud and deception charges stick.

I get quite wound up by stuff like this - just recently a good friend of mine invested in a "Gurus' £10000 package - despite knowing me he decided to not ask my opinion. Turns out really what he was doing was paying £1000- to be an affiliate for this Gurus "revolutionary weight loss course" -- but the Guru used terms like "giving him the opportunity' to 'partner' with him -- all backed up by shots of his swanky home and swanky cars.

My friend like those ripped of in this example was sold the DREAM - due diligence did not even come into it

[Clinton]

Barry, is this a "guru" we've discussed here before?

[midascode]

I just searched his name on forum Clinton - but it shows no results so I suppose not. I shall let you have details privately