It's Over -- the Brock N. Meeks Story

[David Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>]

Posted-Date: Fri, 26 Aug 1994 08:24:42 -0400
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 1994 04:42:23 -0700
From: "Brock N. Meeks" <brock () well sf ca us>
To: bauer () tig com, brock () well sf ca us, com-priv () psi com
Subject: Re: It's Over


Inserted Message:


> From bauer () tig com Thu Aug 25 15:44:07 1994
> Date: Thu, 25 Aug 94 18:48:48 EDT
> From: bauer () tig com (Mike Bauer)
> To: "Brock N. Meeks" <brock () well sf ca us>, com-priv () psi net
> Subject: Re: It's Over


> Geez, Brock.  That was a little terse.  Would you mind providing us
> with more information?  What happened?




Standard Disclaimer:


This message is in response to questions about the lible suit filed against
me because of a CyberWire Dispatch article I wrote about Ben Suarez and his
Suarez Corporation Industries.


Because this message is in response to direct questions, this response
doesn't fall under provisions of my settlement agreement with Suarez that
obligates me to notify him at least 48 hours in advance of publishing any
article about him or his company.




Okay, now that we have the legal bullshit out of the way... let me explain
what's going on here.


Yes, the case is settled.  The lawsuit is gone.


The disclaimer above is very important.  You see, I've agreed to give Benny
and his company buddies 48 hours notice before I publish anything about him
or his company.  If I have any questions for Benny I have to fax them to
him;  he has 42 hours to respond.


I don't even want to explain the bullshit negotiations that went on to get
that language finalized.


So, no big loss.  He gets 48 hours notice.  When doing an important story,
the subject of my article usually knows well in advance of 48 hours that
I'm writing about them.  And anyone that's dealt with the National Security
Agency knows that you have to submit written questions to them;  they don't
answer questions on the phone.  The NSA can take weeks to get back to you.
So, 48 hours is a throwaway.


If I violate these terms, I can be fined $10,000.


HOWEVER... this notification process DOES NOT apply to my REPLIES to
QUESTIONS about the suit or its resolution.


This is why I'm able to write this response, without first notifying Benny.


So, let's take a look at the settlement.  I paid $64 to cover the cost of
Benny's lawyers filing all the paper work.


That's all Benny got out of me.  A measly $64.  This is a big step down
from his earlier demands that I pay the full amount of legal fees he had
incurred up to that point (somewhere around $15,000).


What did he get in return?


Well, if my legal fees ran at least $25,000 (and they are probably higher
by now) then Benny's legal fees are certainly more. His lawyers took
depositions, did discovery.  Steps my lawyers never needed to take.  Why?


It was Benny that SOUGHT THE SETTLEMENT.  Yep, you read it right. I didn't
initiate the settlement talks, Benny and his lawyers sought me out.


So, just for the sake of argument, let's say Benny has had to pony up at
least as much as me, 25 grand, for his lawyers.  For that price he got the
right to include 2 statements in the consent judgement (the legal document
that lays out my responsibilities and liabilities) that clarified 2 points:


First, Benny wants everyone to know that he was NOT involved with the
Gutbuster product.  That was a device that came from a company run by his
BROTHER.  A device the Federal Trade Commission found was defective and
ordered that $500,000 be set aside to pay for refunds, etc.


Based on information provided by Benny, he indeed, appears to not have ANY
involvement with Gutbuster.  Big Deal!  My original article NEVER said he
did!  I clearly stated it was his brother, not him.


Second clarification:  Benny wanted it clear that he, his corporation and
EPS (Electronic Postal Service) have never been the target of a criminal
investigation and have never been charged with a crime.


All true.


Again.  Big Deal. My original article NEVER CLAIMED he violated any
criminal laws.


That's it folks.  That's all Benny really got for his (estimated)
$25,000-plus.


What's surprising is that he could have sat down at a keyboard, just like
you and me to everyday, and banged out a response to my original Dispatch
article, pointing out these clarifications.


Hell, Benny, you could have done more than that!  You could have taken me
apart online if you wanted, debated my article point by point!   The Net
would have loved it!!  Meeks has a worthy Adversary.  Stand back and let
the games begin!


But no... the lawyers got to have all the fun.


Other things in the settlement:


I state that Benny's EPS service "intrigued" me and that I'm not against
commercialization of the Internet and that I believe there are appropriate
commercial uses of the Internet.


Of Course, EPS "intrigued" me!  It intrigued me enough so that I
investigated it and found out it Benny was the one behind it. And of course
I not against the commercialization of the Internet, despite the fact that
Benny's complaint, filed with the court in Cleveland, said I was.  Of
course, I believe there are appropriate commercial uses of the Internet.


This, folks, was a no brainer.  Again, it was Benny that wanted this stated
in the consent judgement.  Fine, no harm, no foul.


The fallout from this?


Well, Benny tells the Wall St. Journal that his business has actually
increased 15% and says of me, "We kind of feel like we could kiss the guy."


Well, okay, Benny... but NO TONGUES.


And for me?  The reputation of CyberWire Dispatch remains intact and even
more high profile.


In the settlement I don't admit that I did anything wrong, I don't admit
any liability, I don't apologize, I don't issue a retraction, I don't issue
a correction.


My reputation remains intact.  And CyberWire Dispatch remains ever on the
watch.


Meeks out...