Peter Shankman / HARO Just Sent Me a Cease-and-Desist Letter. What Now?
ryanwaggoner.com
ryanwaggoner.com
Legally there's very little HARO can do except force you to defend a meritless case. I don't believe they have a leg to stand on. You're not violating copyright, or trademark in any form, and he doesn't have an issued patent.
The one real takeaway is never launch a business and credit the competitor on the site. It just gives them fuel to create legal hassles for you.
Next steps: Get a lawyer. Have your lawyer write a firm letter showing Shankman's lawyer that their claims are meritless and you will vigorously defend the case.
Meantime, this is a great PR coup for you. Tech blogs love a little drama, at least certain ones do. Use it for the free PR.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Though I have had to defend against bogus patent and copyright claims before.
I'd imagine its easier to stay under their radar if your site doesn't directly come up in google alert results for their name too.
BUT, considering that the battle is over the PR business, journalists should be eating this up! I bet a lot of startups wish they could get a high-profile cease and desist hahaha
This is typical in a marketplace where people run out of innovative ideas (or never had them in the first place.) I've been around the "sender" side of this type of thing before. Honest truth, you might get outgunned by legal tactics and that sucks.
You have a more innovative, more focused product. If you're bankrolled then fight it. If not, tread lightly. Once you used his name you set this up. Either way, they will keep sending ridiculous letters.
My advice: -Call an attorney, get some advice. -Setup a backup host and confirm your DNS is separate from your hosting account. (Next up is a C&D to your host) -Send an urgent appeal to everyone on your list, even journalists. You might lose a few followers in the process but if people value your service they will fight for you (particularly nice because your service helps journalists.)
Unless Shankman's lawyers are totally incompetent, there's no way they would ever seriously pursue this, since it's obvious to anyone they have no case.
Personally, I would just drop all references to Shankman and HARO from the website and politely send back an email letting them know you did so, and politely point out that there's no legal basis for any of their other absurd requests.
I don't think there's anything wrong with researching the legal side of things a little bit, then firing off a letter that politely but firmly disagrees with their position.
If they're really serious about coming after you, you'll find out soon enough, and you can get a lawyer then.
Yeah, I know that now. I can't believe how shitty this move is on his part. When I built PRManna, HARO was literally just an AWeber mailing list. I was inspired by the idea of connecting journalists with sources (which is hardly Shankman's original idea) and thought I could do a better job, but I wanted to give him a shout-out and some credit. No good deed goes unpunished.
Yes, using his name in any way that implies he endorsed your site or is somehow affiliated with it will get you in trouble because such use essentially would seek to capitalize on someone's reputation for your own commercial exploitation (with actors, etc., this is called a "right of publicity" and you get into big trouble if you run afoul of that particular doctrine).
That said, if your use of his name did not state or imply that he approved or endorsed your site, or imply affiliation between him and the site, you may not have quite the problem you assume you have from use of the name. Check with a good lawyer to discuss in detail.
Though the details you give are sketchy, what I read between the lines is this: this guy has a nice little cash stream going from this; you might threaten it with a superior offering; he can't possibly beat you competitively; ergo, he will try to position things to try force you to let him grab your superior site for his own benefit or else face the alternative of having to pay many thousands in legal fees to defend against his claims. That is what I mainly infer from the claim that you supposedly violated his rights by allegedly misappropriating his "idea" (this sounds frivolous on its face, as most ideas that are out in public are not protectable unless they are connected with an enforceable patent). Why do I infer this? Because, if he succeeds in causing you to cave, the normal remedy for resolving the theft of an idea is for you to assign over to him the fruit of your work embodying that idea (that is, your site).
I know this sounds awful and it may not be true (again, I don't know any details). But all the surface indicators would seem to point that way. If this is the true picture, then your strategy will likely be to figure out a way to persevere in spite of the legal harassment until you gain commercial viability as an enterprise. You need to explore such issues in detail with your lawyer. The good news is that there probably is a workable path for you on this if the claims lack merit - it is one thing to be hit with a legal claim that exposes you to true substantial liabilities but quite another to have to fend off one that is lacking in merit (usually much, much easier to deal with the latter because the big threat lies solely in its nuisance value).
When honesty gets you into trouble.
I look at this and think for a journalist, reporter or PR hack this could be a defining point in how your company can make it. So tread carefully. Having said that, what you have done is validate the idea by identifying a competitor who wants what you have have - but paying as little as possible, using the lawyers as bullies. This is where YC as opposed to NYC might be able to give advice. Would it be any good to shoot pg a very short email with attached url?
Get legal advice.
How would you feel if instead of offering to partner, I borrowed the concept of your business (after you had spent a few years proving the model) and started a competitor while only crediting you for the inspiration?
I bet you'd be wee bit annoyed, no?
And WTF is the part about, "oh, by the way we demand that you hand your site over to us?" A C&D letter is to get him to CEASE and DESIST, you can't use it to perform a hostile takeover of a competitor.
C&D letters have no teeth. Court actions have teeth, and that hasn't happened.
Nothing to see here, really. Except laughable claims and example of poor business strategy.
What was funny to me is that Ryan set a trap and the guy (Shankman) bit the bait. It was Jason Calacanis style PR strategy at its best and clever if intentional. Why Ryan called getting a C&D a 'shitty move' is the non-congruent part. Ryan asked for it and Shankman delivered a delightfully poor response in spades. Total PR coup for Ryan.
Side note: If you run a half decent business you'll have your fair share of C&D letters and meritless lawsuits. Not worth wasting any emotion over. Just factor the legal cost into your cash projections and out-execute the heck out of everyone.
That being said, I'm working on blog post about your situation. You'll see...
On what legal grounds does HARO even have a case?
The point being that it's probably not so much about him not liking that you mentioned him[2], as the fact that you're stepping onto his turf, and him wanting to defend it.
[1] = http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/news/adweek_haro_is_800k...
[2] = You write: "I’m pretty disappointed that Peter decided to be such a jackass about this. If he had bothered to write me an email, I would have gladly removed his name and never mentioned this to anyone."
I personally think HARO needs a kick in the arse, quality and innovation wise.
Bring it on.
From our points of view: for the best that it didn't, plus he looks like an ass.
My immediate response to the "What Now?" was do some research on this guy. Five minutes of Google searching and Ryan is in a much better position knowing who he's dealing with...
Note that knowing about Peter's past legal stuff doesn't change the options: 1. Give up, give in. 2. Stand up and fight. 3. Get a lawyer and decide to do 1 or 2.
That said, here are some links that may be of interest. Please note I have no vested interest in either party - just was curious.
Wonder if I'll get a C&D too for sharing information: 1. The lawyer representing HARO, who's done some 9-11 related work: http://www.andersonkill.com/attorneysprofile.asp?id=5141 2. WIRED coverage: http://www.wired.com/epicenter/tag/help-a-reporter-out/ 3. Past domain arbitration for Peter's LLC: http://domain.adrforum.com/domains/decisions/1259290.htm 4. MediaBistro coverage of a conflict between Shankman's LLC and a PR agency: http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/agencies/former_haro_pr_...
You need to look through everything and see if there's any word for word content on your site (user contributed or otherwise) that matches Shankman's site.
My guess is that they'll cede the look and feel and New York business law wackyness to create a sheen of compromise and then surprise you with some user generated content that appears on both your sites identically and claim copyright infringement.
The fog of how user generated stuff ends up on sites may confuse the court enough for them to rule against you just because Shankman's site existed first and theres "identical content". Hell, even his lawyer may not fully grok it.
If the evil runs deep, they'll plant such content themselves in the form of submissions.
Of course, talk to a lawyer, yadayada, like you haven't already! Don't underestimate them. This looks like a plan to take over your (obviously better) site. I believe that they think they can win.
"A patent cannot be obtained upon a mere idea or suggestion."
i think your app needs work. focus on that. once a better mouse trap comes out, i think reporters would flock to it. he claims his success is about the trust he's built with reporters. trust? he email blasts these requests with full reporter contact info twice a day to millions of people via email! (well, actually he finally started hiding reporter email with an anonymizer earlier this year).
Frivolous harrassment is always an option of course, sure. The advice I give at the Founder Institute is to try not to needlessly annoy or upset the people who are likely to sue you.
So while posting the letter would be fun, it would also make it more likely that you get hit with legal fees. Your call.
Good luck with this, Ryan. This really sucks. FWIW, I thought your version was a great approach when I read about it first and significantly distinct from HARO.
There are issues that arise if you use other people's trademarks. But these can be avoided if you use the proper disclaimers. So yeah speak to a lawyer. Although, at this point it would probably be longer than a 15 minute consultation.
Personally, I'd never heard of HARO until you mentioned it. Since your site was pretty much empty and I wanted to network with reporters, I went over and signed up for HARO. In the end, they gained a user and you did not.
All this guy can do is hope that you don't execute as well as him.
Regardless of what your opinions are here, you need to speak to an attorney who can properly advise you before soapboxing.
The title ends in "What Now?", the OP asks HN if it's legal to post the C&D letter, and no where in the OP's blog does it say "Of course I've contacted my lawyer".
earle's advice is the best advice posted yet.
Btw, the name of his company makes this whole thing sound like a joke.
http://img.skitch.com/20100227-bfr884xr63ffm3ducic3t2qq7r.jp...
I have no idea when it changed (and I can't find a screenshot of how it was before), but I submitted a request to HARO about six weeks ago and it looked nothing like it does today, so at some point in the last couple months they launched the current redesign.
EDIT: Until very recently, HARO looked like this (url says December 2009):
http://www.smallbusinesscomputing.com/img/2009/12/1214haro.j...
Maybe I should sue them...perhaps they somehow saw my screenshots and decided to copy them! :)
your happy to (and have) remove references to HARO from PRManna
that a simple email indicating this was a problem would have been sufficient. Express concern over the need for lawyers
that you believe the HARO redesign came after PRManna design was created
indicate you feel the matter is now concluded happily for you
but that if they wish to continue to pursue "frivolous" claims you believe you have the evidence required to obtain full damages from HARO due to the design copyright infringement
that you will be happy to countersue
IANAL but that is what I would do. Throw the ball politely back into their court - in the meantime, as a "just in case", speak to a lawyer a build a case. If they reply back aggressively file the suit straight away. It will probably scare him off. (as I said IANAL and I dont know much about this guy; so it might not work).
I've employed a roughly similar tactic before against someone with a frivolous claim who thought he could win by flexing muscles. When I filed against him there was about a week of disbelieving silence when he realised I knew where I stood legally. At which point it all stood down (I accepted an contract between us in which he accepted I wasnt infringing on him as he had asserted previously).
That's the last piece of advice: probably dont pursue the suit. Because if you give him time to get his head straight then he has more cash to buy sneaky lawyers and build a case. Accept any reasonable offer (preferably a contract like I described because then he cant lick wounds for a month or so then come back and hit you with big guns)