"They publicly threatened me, just to show their arrogance," he told El Reg by email.

He told us that Creative contacted him on a chat session. "They were sarcastic, ironic and asked me if I wanted something from them, as if I were expecting something," he wrote. "It was my protest against them and would like to see how far it would go."

He acknowledges that Creative has a case regarding intellectual property, but is furious about the company's strategy. "I'd say they are stealing [from] their own customers by disabling features based on technologies they own (so they did it on purpose) and by charging for a software that requires an improved driver that they refuse to provide."

"At least they are getting flamed all over the web and they are certainly mad about it. That is enough reward for my hard work," he wrote.

Creative climbs down over home brew Vista drivers [The Register]
(Photo: Young Frankenstein)
PREVIOUSLY: Creative Sparks Customer Revolt When It Tries To Silence Third-Party Programmer

Over the weekend, Creative's forums have exploded with posts from angry customers who have sworn to stop buying their products. There's already a boycott site up at boycottcreative.com.

A Creative Forum poster named "youAREkidding" summed up Creative's stupidity quite nicely:

Imagine what would happen if 10%, just 10% of the people who will read about this, be in a store somewhere, see someone about to buy a Creative Labs product, and say to that potential customer. "If you have Vista, Creative has non-functioning drivers for it, there was a guy who created a Modified driver, but Creative made him stop distributing it, and there are still no workable drivers for Vista." Some people might laugh at him, but the majority of computer perhiperal buyers don't know squat, and if they hear it from someone who presents themselves in a knowledgeable manner, they may actually think twice about it. Creative loses another sale.
 
So, yes, Daniel may very well have stepped on some copyright rules, and Creative had the lawful option of doing what they did. Score 100 on the law, score minus several millions for not doing the job themselves in the first place, and putting someone like Daniel in a position where he had to do what he did, just to get the customers of this company happy.

Let me just remind you that for example NVIDIA still supports GeForce generations 5, 6, 7, and 8 in their latest video drivers for XP, XP64, Vista, Linux and Mac OSX. All those old cards still get performance improvements instead of being crippled.

Newbie
Posts: 1
Registered: 03-30-2008
newegg
Message 1179 of 1,436
Viewed 2,595 times
 
To Whom it May Concern:
 
While it is not our place to condemn the decisions of Creative regarding this issue, our customers come first. That being said, it has come to our attention that many of our customers are not happy with the products Creative has released nor the support for those products. To wit, we have processed nearly 5,000 return orders within the past 48 hours. While it is not normally in our best interest to publically comment in a manufacturer's forum, the overwhelming concensus has left us little choice. As such, effective tommorow morning newegg.com will suspend sales of the sound cards in question, particularly those indicated as "Vista compatible", pending an investigation into the matter. Those of you whom recently ordered such a card will still recieve your product as indicated in any relevant conversations. While we regret this abrupt decision, it has been deemed neccessary to protect the interest of our consumers. We welcome contact from Creative as soon as is possible so that we may resolve this issue.
 
Thank you,
 
Newegg.com
http://www.newegg.com

Daniel_K:
 
We are aware that you have been assisting owners of our Creative sound cards for some time now, by providing unofficial driver packages for Vista that deliver more of the original functionality that was found in the equivalent XP packages for those sound cards. In principle we don't have a problem with you helping users in this way, so long as they understand that any driver packages you supply are not supported by Creative. Where we do have a problem is when technology and IP owned by Creative or other companies that Creative has licensed from, are made to run on other products for which they are not intended. We took action to remove your thread because, like you, Creative and its technology partners think it is only fair to be compensated for goods and services. The difference in this case is that we own the rights to the materials that you are distributing. By enabling our technology and IP to run on sound cards for which it was not originally offered or intended, you are in effect, stealing our goods. When you solicit donations for providing packages like this, you are profiting from something that you do not own. If we choose to develop and provide host-based processing features with certain sound cards and not others, that is a business decision that only we have the right to make.
 
Although you say you have discontinued your practice of distributing unauthorized software packages for Creative sound cards we have seen evidence of them elsewhere along with donation requests from you. We also note in a recent post of yours on these forums, that you appear to be contemplating the release of further packages. To be clear, we are asking you to respect our legal rights in this matter and cease all further unauthorized distribution of our technology and IP. In addition we request that you observe our forum rules and respect our right to enforce those rules. If you are in any doubt as to what we would consider unacceptable then please request clarification through one of our forum moderators before posting.
 
Phil O'Shaughnessy
VP Corporate Communications
Creative Labs Inc.

Santa Clara University School of Law professor Eric Goldman, who has advised RealSelf on the case, posts about the issue on his personal blog:

No matter how many times I see it—and in the Internet era, I see it all too frequently—I always shake my head in disappointment and frustration when a company uses trademark law to lash out against unflattering consumer reviews. To these companies, trademark law is a cure-all tonic for their marketplace travails, and trademark doctrine is so plastic and amorphous that defendants have some difficulty mounting a proper defense. As a result, all too frequently, the threat of a trademark lawsuit causes the intermediary to capitulate and excise valuable content from the Internet.

In its answer, RealSelf goes on the offensive and alleges that Lifestyle Lift directly or indirectly posted shill reviews to the Lifestyle Lift discussion, thereby breaching RealSelf's user agreement. Off the top of my head, I can't think of another lawsuit where the message board operator sued a company for shill postings, so I think this case may be breaking important new legal ground.

We're having a hard time believing that "INFOMERCIAL SCAMS - LIFESTYLE LIFT COMPLAINTS" is an authentic product of a concerned consumer, which makes us even more curious about RealSelf's counterclaim that Lifestyle Lift astroturfed on the RealSelf site:

We believe they have violated our terms of use by posing as patients posting reviews on our site, which is misleading and unfair to our community. These sort of fabricated posts threaten our community's trust in us. We have no choice but to challenge these actions.

"Lifestyle Lift Tries to Use TM Law to Shut Down User Discussions; Website Countersues for Shilling—Lifestyle Lift v. RealSelf" [Eric Goldman - Technology & Marketing Law Blog]

(Photo: Warner Bros.)

This is an excerpt of Stephen's original complaint, posted over 18 months ago:

My most recent bout came with a company named Tiny Details based out of Syracuse, NY. My wife was interested in earning some extra money for us from home, a prospect that I found very appealing. What with our son and all, it's really not feasible for her to go to work, so finding her a way to draw income at home was ideal.

I found Tiny Details while researching along those lines. I considered the link pointing to it to be more legitimate than most (and trust me, I know a lot about links). The site seemed a bit unprofessional, which should have been a big tip-off, but I didn't find anyone saying anything negative about it. My wife was very excited at the prospect, as much as she loves arts and crafts.

Unfortunately, I didn't do my research as thoroughly as I should have. It wasn't until after we had bought a kit for my wife that I came across these Tiny Details customer complaints and some more recent warnings about Tiny Details. I also managed to find the Tiny Details Better Business Bureau report. I'm ashamed to say that I missed such glaring stop signs. I guess I must have been dreamy eyed over their false promises rather than incredulous as I rightfully should have been.

At any rate, I've cancelled our order and plan to seek reimbursement through whatever means necessary, up to and including legal action. I don't expect them to make it easy; companies like this never do. I fully suspect it's money that I'll never see again one way or another, in which case I'll take it as $55 worth of valuable education: If it seems too good to be true, it is. Do your research first, and do it right.

Email #1:

I am writing about the substantively incorrect postings that you have on your website.

I am asking that you remove this point immediately. Your representation of Tiny Details is inacurate and libelous.

I have forwarded this information to our company attorney, along with your domain registration information.

Please govern yourself accordingly.

Kristopher Buchan
President
Tiny Details, LLC

Email #2:

Mr. Ward,

You will be hearing from our attorney.

What you have posted is indeed libel.

I am in the process of seeking your address through your domain registrating information. You will be hearing from us shortly.

Kristopher Buchan

From WAHM.com

"You also reminded me that I had sent them a kit (to Christian Miniatures actually) on Nov. the 30th. I added a "Delivery Confirmation" on the package, and it states that they received it on Dec. the 2nd. I had returned a completed kit that needed corrections. It's the 21st already and I've heard nothing. I just called and they just have a recording stating that they're unavailable and to leave a message for a return call (yeah, like THAT'S gonna happen!). So, I just sent them an email with Deliver Receipt Proof. Two weeks ago they had told me they'd never received it, so they couldn't tell me anything about it. The receipt showed that they HAD received it. Hmmm, something fishy's going on here!!!"(posted by rtanza, December 2004)

"Well, I finally heard from Tiny Details today - it seems as though my returned materials were also "never received". I filed a complaint with the BBB. I foolishly did not send my materials with a return receipt so I really can't prove anything... but it's really not the money part of this that is so annoying to me, I just can't stand the idea of folks being taken advantage of like this. Oh well, live and learn..." (posted by scarletbrook, January 2005)

From Rip-Off Report

I decided to try sending them back their own perfect samples as my first sample to see if they were accepted. They made sure to reassure me that they wanted one sample sent back to them so they could inspect it and save me any trouble making a bunch of mistakes. The only problem with that was that I had to send them a sample and wait longer to see if it even passed their ridiclous inspection. Suprise! It didn't pass. Wow, go figure. Now I know I have been scammed. I even sent an e-mail to them saying that I sent them their own sample to see how truthful they were and they rejected it. I have yet to get a response. I'm sure that this is just another scam and that I'm out $55 because I was fooled into falling for it. (posted by Leila, April 2006)

But you can't get all ham-fisted with complaints about your service and try to sue former customers into silence, Buchan. Besides, Stephen's initial post is so vague that it doesn't say much more beyond "I decided not to do business with them." Based on Buchan's aggression towards an unhappy former customer who was just stating his opinion, we think Stephen made the right call.

"Tiny Details" [Project Paradox]
"Rather than listening to its critics, president of company threatens blogger with libel lawsuit" [Bloggasm]

RELATED
Tiny Details
"BBB Reliability Report for Tiny Details LLC" [Better Business Bureau]
(Photo: Paul Keleher)