Jump to content

Palmer v. Kleargear.com: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
[pending revision][pending revision]
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Remove unreliable sources. Add reliable sources. Copy edits and fixes. Gersten is the President, not the CEO.
The propaganda used today by Mr. Bermender to lasso affiliates
Line 6: Line 6:
|location = [[Grandville, Michigan]]
|location = [[Grandville, Michigan]]
|area_served = Worldwide
|area_served = Worldwide
|key_people = Lee Gersten (President)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2404869,00.asp|title=Nerdy Footwear Lets You Fly Your Geek Flag|last=Poeter|first=Damon|work=[[PC Magazine]]|date=2012-05-24|accessdate=2014-06-29}}</ref>
|key_people = William Franklin Bermender,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abestweb.com/marketplace/programs/kleargear/}}</ref>
Lee Gersten (President)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2404869,00.asp|title=Nerdy Footwear Lets You Fly Your Geek Flag|last=Poeter|first=Damon|work=[[PC Magazine]]|date=2012-05-24|accessdate=2014-06-29}}</ref>
}}
}}


Revision as of 04:29, 30 June 2014

Kleargear
IndustryRetail
Founded(2001 (2001))
HeadquartersGrandville, Michigan
Area served
Worldwide
Key people
William Franklin Bermender,[1] Lee Gersten (President)[2]

Kleargear is an online retailer that specialises in nerd apparel, geek toys, gadgets and office toys. It was founded in 2001.[3] Paris-based Descoteaux Boutiques owns them.[4]

Controversy

In November 2013, Kleargear suffered a serious Internet backlash[5] after it was reported that they fined Jen Palmer of Layton, Utah $3,500 for posting a negative review online on Ripoff Report,[6] when the customer failed to receive the order she had placed. This was carried out under an anti-disparagement clause of their site's terms and conditions. When Palmer and her husband John refused to pay, Kleargear reported the fine for collection, which dragged down their credit rating.[7]

The decision by Kleargear to fine the woman under their terms and conditions has raised ethical questions concerning whether a corporation can automatically waive a customer's free-speech rights as a condition of sale and affect a customer's credit rating.[8] In the face of rising backlash, the retailer removed the clause in question, though the clause appeared to have only first been added after Jen Palmer placed her order and posted the negative review.[9] Kleargear closed its Facebook page and protected its Twitter account after repeated attacks.[10] The public backlash against KlearGear's actions are an example of the Streisand effect.[11]

Both the Better Business Bureau and TRUSTe have issued statements that Kleargear used their logos without permission and have begun investigations. Experian has also begun an investigation on the credit report.[12]

On November 25, 2013, Public Citizen, representing John and Jen Palmer, sent an open letter that demanded Kleargear pay the Palmers $75,000, remove the taint on their credit rating, and cease and desist from using the non-disparagement clause in the future.[13][14] After Kleargear ignored a December 16, 2013 deadline to respond to the offer, Public Citizen sued the company in federal court for Fair Credit Reporting Act violations, defamation and other torts.[15][16] According to attorney Scott Michelman, numerous attempts to get in touch with Kleargear before the suit were unsuccessful. Michelman said that the company's address in Grandville, Michigan turned out to be a mail drop.[17]

In March 2014, a federal judge entered a default judgment in favor of the Palmers. Not only did Kleargear fail to send a representative to respond to the suit, but several attempts to serve Kleargear with the complaint were unsuccessful. According to court documents, one attempt failed when someone at KlearGear's "headquarters" in Grandville rejected the delivery, and it was returned as undeliverable to another address in Texas. The terms were not disclosed, but Public Citizen had asked for $70,000 plus attorney's fees.[18][19] Kleargear claimed the default judgment was not valid because notice should have been served to its parent company in France.[20] The Palmers were awarded $306,750 in compensatory and punitive damages on June 25, 2014.[4][21]

On March 26, 2014, Techdirt reported that the non-disparagement clause had been restored to Kleargear's terms of service. Techdirt also revealed that Kleargear appeared to have reinstated a clause that allowed it to bill a customer $50 if it received a chargeback, and also gave it the right to bill an additional $500 if that fee was reported for collection.[22] Kleargear stated that the non-disparagement clause had never been deleted but only moved.[20]

References

  1. ^ http://www.abestweb.com/marketplace/programs/kleargear/. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  2. ^ Poeter, Damon (2012-05-24). "Nerdy Footwear Lets You Fly Your Geek Flag". PC Magazine. Retrieved 2014-06-29.
  3. ^ "KlearGear about us page". KlearGear.com. Retrieved 27 November 2013.
  4. ^ a b Farivar, Cyrus (2014-06-25). "KlearGear must pay $306,750 to couple that left negative review". Ars Technica. Retrieved 2014-06-29.
  5. ^ Frauenfelder, Mark (2013-11-15). "Kleargear bills woman". BoingBoing. Retrieved 2013-11-27.
  6. ^ "BBC News - A case for reading the small print". BBC News Magazine Monitor. 2013-11-18. Retrieved 2013-11-26.
  7. ^ McNally, Victoria (2013-11-19). "Company Tries to Fine Customer $3,500 for Leaving Negative Review Online". Mashable. Retrieved 2013-11-26.
  8. ^ Gephardt, Matt (2013-11-21). "Fined For Posting a Negative Review Online". KUTV. Retrieved 2013-11-26.
  9. ^ Cushing, Tim (2013-11-14). "Online Retailer Says If You Give It A Negative Review It Can Fine You $3,500". Techdirt. Retrieved 2013-11-26.
  10. ^ Biggs, John (2013-11-18). "KlearGear Goes Into Social Media Lockdown After It Charges Customers For Posting Bad Reviews". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2013-11-26.
  11. ^ Brustein, Joshua (2013-12-18). "A Company Is Sued Over Its 'No Bad Reviews' Clause". Business Week. Retrieved 2013-12-25.
  12. ^ Gephardt, Matt (2013-11-21). "Follow Up: Action on Behalf of Woman Fined for Penning Negative Online Review". KUTV. Retrieved 2013-11-27.
  13. ^ Kim, Susanna (2013-11-26). "Utah Couple Fined $3,500 by Online Merchant KlearGear Retains Lawyer, Turns Tables". ABC News. Retrieved 2013-11-28.
  14. ^ "Public Citizen Suing On Behalf Of Customers Whose Credit Was Ruined By KlearGear's $3,500 'Bad Review' Fee". Techdirt. 2013-11-26. Retrieved 2013-11-27.
  15. ^ Nelson, Steven (2013-12-18). "Retailer That Fined Couple $3,500 for Negative Review Hit With Lawsuit". U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved 2013-12-21.
  16. ^ "Public Citizen Sues Online Retailer That Damaged Utah Customer's Credit in Retaliation for Critical Online Review". Public Citizen. 2013-12-18. Retrieved 2013-12-25.
  17. ^ Piper, Matthew (2013-12-18). "Layton couple sue KlearGear for $3,500 negative-review charge". The Salt Lake Tribune.
  18. ^ Gephardt, Matt (2014-03-21). "Defiance May Soon Pay Off for Couple Fined Over Negative Comments". KUTV.
  19. ^ Van Geer, Rachel (2014-03-17). "Utah couple wins suit against KlearGear.com". WOOD-TV.
  20. ^ a b Farivar, Cyrus (2014-05-20). "Embattled retailer KlearGear fights back against online review defeat". Ars Technica.
  21. ^ "Bad review couple win compensation". BBC News. 2014-06-26. Retrieved 2014-06-29.
  22. ^ Cushing, Tim (2014-03-26). "KlearGear No-Shows Hearing, Reinstates $3,500 Non-Disparagement Clause". Techdirt.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palmer_v._Kleargear.com&oldid=614970362"