Posted by DD/OR on 10/10/06 10:01pm
Msg #151566

I received an email about NNA Posts.

I received an email from Harry informing me that an NNA lawyer contacted him. He threatened to sue the authors of negative posts about NNA, for Libel. Did anyone else receive an email from Harry? I didn't think I said anything that bad about NNA. Just that I had cancelled my membership. Since when is telling the truth against the law? Anyway, the lawyer wants Harry to delete the posts of anyone that posted negative things about NNA. That's allright with me. That just don't quit.

Reply by Lee/AR on 10/10/06 10:10pm
Msg #151569

Uh... in order for it to be 'libel', it has to be untrue. Negative truths just don't cut it.
....and he huffed and he puffed... and the house made of bricks still stood. (excerpt from the 3 Little Pigs seemed appropriate here.)

Reply by TitleGalCA on 10/10/06 10:22pm
Msg #151572

The contents of this post have been removed by Notary Rotary at the request of the author.

Reply by Poppy on 10/10/06 10:31pm
Msg #151579

That would be plain silly for the NNA to file suit against

the authors of negative posts. Imagine the negative publicity they would receive.

Tip from grandma to the powers that be at the NNA...

"Don't cut off your nose to spite your face" Silly, Silly boys...

Reply by DD/OR on 10/10/06 10:32pm
Msg #151580

There are a lot of posts on here against the NNA. I guess they'll all have to come down. That's too bad. Now we won't be able to warn newcomers.

Reply by Jenny_CA on 10/10/06 10:32pm
Msg #151581

I wonder if the Compliance Certificate for CA notaries that Dan ( from another site) provided(s) is cutting into their background check $$ ??

Reply by Larry/Ca on 10/10/06 11:33pm
Msg #151602

It's my understanding that.....

the backgroundcheck that California notaries had when they were commissioned did NOT include a criminal check in other states which might mean it would not be acceptable to nationsl companies. Who knows?

Reply by DogmongerCA on 10/11/06 8:25am
Msg #151688

The Department of Justice performs all CA notary Background

Checks. I am not an attorney, nor do I pose as one on the Internet, but that check is the same check as given to teachers, and the livescan fingerprinting is checked against national databases. It will supercede any BC that the NNA is advertising

Reply by CaliNotary on 10/10/06 11:31pm
Msg #151599

Seems to me that the NNA contacting Harry and making those kinds of threats just adds validity to a case against them for anti competitive actions.

Reply by MB_AZ on 10/10/06 11:15pm
Msg #151595

Oh come on -- this is just a forum

It's not all right with me for NR to delete negative chat. This is just a forum that the good bad and ugly needs to be shared. What the he11! What ever happened to Free Speech?

Reply by DD/OR on 10/10/06 11:30pm
Msg #151597

Re: Oh come on -- this is just a forum

I know what you mean. But I'm thinking that maybe they're threatening Harry too, just like they're threatening us. I certainly hope not, but who knows what they're capable of. Anyway, my mouth is shut about the NNA. It appears that free speech is just an illusion.

Reply by CaliNotary on 10/10/06 11:32pm
Msg #151601

Re: Oh come on -- this is just a forum

Well what did Harry's email say? Did he tell you not to discuss the NNA on this board anymore?

Reply by MistarellaFL on 10/10/06 11:39pm
Msg #151607

Re: Oh come on -- this is just a forum

I'll bet they are more concerned with the proposed BGC, et al that he is considering offering.
Like someone earlier mentioned, it is not libel when truthful.

Reply by DD/OR on 10/10/06 11:54pm
Msg #151612

Message Deleted

This message has been deleted by a forum moderator.

Reason: Generally Inappropriate

Reply by MistarellaFL on 10/11/06 12:05am
Msg #151615

There are words in each of the posts

that I think could be considered inflammatory (from a legal perspective).
The posters in other message numbers you didn't list did not use the same or similar verbiage.
If you are interested inwhat the 2 words I suspect aroused the NNA, email me off-forum and I'll clue you in. I am not going to repeat them here and agitate anyone
(not tonight, anyway, lol)
I'm sure the posters of the other 2 posts were contacted, too.
I see words they chose that could be construed that way.

Reply by DD/OR on 10/11/06 12:11am
Msg #151621

Re: There are words in each of the posts

Mistarella, you missed the point. Those weren't my posts.

Reply by MistarellaFL on 10/11/06 8:56am
Msg #151695

DD/OR

I din't miss the point. Those other posters were contacted as well, and given the same alternatives you were.
Your post had 2 words that stuck out to me like a sore thumb, asn might be construed as defamatory, in a legal description of the word.
That is what their issue is with your post.
Not that I diagree with your opinion, but a judge/jury might.

Reply by Harry [NR] on 10/11/06 1:06am
Msg #151637

Re: Oh come on -- this is just a forum

DD-

Please take a moment to re-read the e-mail I sent you as well as my other post in this thread. Free speech is by no means an illusion nor are negative or critical statements as long as those statements are opinion or true and grounded in fact.

Despite all of the NNA-bashing that occurs on this board, this is the first time we have heard from them in an official capacity. In other words, NNA recognizes the right to free speech as evidenced by the fact that they do not try to squash every negative opinion that comes along. They probably also recognize that baseless legal actions would be vexatious in nature and tantamount to interference with free trade and unfair competition through abuse of economic power and the legal system.

In the case at-hand, however, the statements they have taken issue with were fairly pointed and, in their interpretation, not clearly stated as opinion. So, they are drawing the line. To the extent that you are at-risk of legal action by NNA and as a reminder to temper your posts, it is our obligation to notify you of their take-down demand and to give you the choice to amend or retract the post in question.

Harry
Notary Rotary

Reply by DD/OR on 10/11/06 1:25am
Msg #151639

Re: Oh come on -- this is just a forum

Harry, I don't get it. The posts that you and NNA are concerned about are the ones about background checks. I never, ever made a comment about background checks. I posted one message about NNA but it wasn't about the background checks. I have no opinion, one way or another about their background checks. I'm not a member of NNA. I'm confused. I don't understand all the hoopla over my 1 post, which I guess now, I shouldn't have posted. But like I said it wasn't about BG checks. I give you permission to delete any or all of my posts as you deem necessary. Have a good one.

Reply by Harry [NR] on 10/10/06 11:38pm
Msg #151606

The National Notary Association has respectfully asked that a very limited number of posts related to their single-source, required background check certification be removed due to potentially defamatory content.

Because we are not responsible for the opinions of others and have been afforded a legal blanket of protection under 47 U.S.C sec. 230 as related to defamation and libel claims with respect to statements made by third parties, we have forwarded the NNA request to the authors of the posts in question and have given them two options: 1) To amend the posts, or 2) To have us remove the posts.

Implicit in the NNA request and the law is the threat of a lawsuit against the notaries in question.

With that said, we are asking that everyone take a moment to review the Notary Talk Rules & Guidelines for your own information and well-being. In particular:

"Because the forum is only lightly moderated, we ask that all users govern themselves in accordance with common standards of decency and professionalism. We are not responsible for the opinions of others nor do we condone or support unfounded accusations, personal attacks or other generally bad behavior."

When posting, please be sure to make it clear that your post is your opinion. If you are going to present something as fact, please support it as such with factual arguments.

Harry
Notary Rotary

Reply by MichiganAl on 10/11/06 12:06am
Msg #151618

And I'm supposed to believe they care about the notary?

This makes them look like bullies. I don't much like bullies.

Reply by MistarellaFL on 10/11/06 12:08am
Msg #151620

Re: And I'm supposed to believe they care about the notary?

That's an adjective that can be used

Reply by DD/OR on 10/11/06 12:14am
Msg #151623

Re: And I'm supposed to believe they care about the notary?

Be careful what you say, they're listening.lol

Reply by christiSocal on 10/11/06 3:30am
Msg #151655

It is my opinion

that the NNA is a pain in most notaries tushes!

Reply by BrendaTx on 10/11/06 7:08am
Msg #151668

What a perceived bully could be faced with....

I don't like bullies either, Alex. (Can I say that with a Bully watching?) FWIW, this is my opinion, it's theoretical, just a talking point and it does not refer to anyone except a true Bully.

In my experience, it costs at least $750 (really the bare minimum) to have a petition prepared and filed against another person or entity. The filing fees alone in a regular county court at law in Texas will be around $250. That means those who are being aimed at IMHO, of course, are perceived as individually damaging a Bully by this much just to scare them into silence. If it goes on....


Before they can do anything they must determine jurisdiction...is it Iowa (NR's home) or is it Oregon, or it is California (where the notaries live and type on this forum from)?

Petition filed once they determine that which says:

This lone notary keeps us from earning $xxx.xx because they do not like ____ about us and state this publically on notary forum. Please make them cease and desist. Oh yeah, we need a temporary injunction to do that until this case is tried.

Temporary injunction: We are going to file a temporary injunction to shut them up. We will pay another $xxx to have this served upon them when this hearing is over--if we win. Also, this is probably a waste of money because any defendant we approach will not be shadowed to assure they cannot create false profiles to continue to state their OPINION.

Next, we will have a hearing on the temporary injunction to make them be quiet, though they will probably have created a dozen fake profiles all over the internet to state their concerns now. We will follow them around dilligently and make sure to check every IP on every post and never let them create a false profile to speak from? (Oh dear--someone check with research and development...and finance also... to see how much that will cost us.)

After the temporary injunction, we will need to continue to battle this out to make it a permanent injunction. OMG...do we have time for all those hearings????

That's when we will get back to proving how the notary talk forum commentary is losing us money."

And, then there's the problem with a counter-suit. Counter-suits are almost always filed against a Bully for being time-consuming and frivolous.

It gives me a headache. It would give a judge a headache, as well.

There will be the need for lots of $$$ to see this through on just one notary.

TO ME, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, this is a well-timed threat/move to get Harry too busy to offer CBCs...but that's just MY OPINION!

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/11/06 11:59pm
Msg #151887

Re: What a perceived bully could be faced with....

ROFLMAO!!! Oh, Brenda, this was just too priceless!! But that's JMO.

[For the record, in case there is any question or doubt, "JMO" - or "jmo" - means "just my opinion", pretty much the same idea as "JMHO" or "jmho", both of which stand for "just my humble opinion". Just in case there is any doubt on the part of anyone. Or any organization. Or any other lurkers or posters who might be unreasonably influenced.

BTW, I expect to be using these abbreviations quite a bit in the future - on those occasions when I actually find time to post. For the record...]

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 10/11/06 4:16am
Msg #151657

A lot of the same is being posted on several other sites ...

Seems that a nerve has been touched. Well, everyone is free to respond in their own way. My way is not to send any more $$ to the NNA.

Reply by jlissem on 10/11/06 7:11am
Msg #151670

I think the NNA blinked,
Would like to have copy of this threat so that I can discuss it with my legal counsel.
I have also contacted Senator and Congressman regarding their published statement that the GBL
"Is a Federally mandated requirement to have Notary Publics subjected to a complete backround check"
It is one thing to say that some title companies will require whatever they want and another to try to abuse the Federal Laws. Will they require that notaries comply with EOE laws, Minnimum wage laws,
OSHA laws etc.etc,

Reply by BrendaTx on 10/11/06 7:19am
Msg #151673

**Would like to have copy of this threat so that I can discuss it with my legal counsel.**

Let us know what you learn, jlissem.

Most notaries who have been in the business a long time have connections with attorneys.

A good percentage of notaries who do this started out as legal secretaries, or working in the county legal system, etc. In Texas everyone knows a lawyer or two...my aunt is a lawyer, my cousin is a lawyer - California and New York...many of my longtime friends are lawyers or judges.

Reply by BrendaTx on 10/11/06 7:23am
Msg #151674

Also, I was at the capitol when the NNA went to the judicial review committee and wanted to make mandatory law about notary education. Of course, the NNA would be the teacher. I was there to voice the opinion that notaries need education, but through other avenues besides the NNA...for instance, the Texas Bar. That's fact. Not opinion. It's actually on video somewhere.

The locals in Texas were there in droves at the hearing. The NNA did not >>seem<< to have much influence. (That's opinion--"seem" is the operative word.)

Reply by jlissem on 10/11/06 7:40am
Msg #151675

Brenda I have a child that is an attorney who has extensive experience in compliance with a major bank.
They are also a Director of the parent company of the bank.
I also have 35 years as a CEO of a private corp. I still retain corp, atty. Have been involved in a number of lawsuits in my career ( won some, lost some, good ERA)
Got bored with retirement and run a small statewide signing network, Not a s/s. Our notaries set a fee
and I provide marketing and support. The company is billed by our corp. Fee is divided 80% notary,20% Corp.
The NNA has ruffled my featers and I don't like it!

Reply by Linda_in_MI on 10/11/06 7:49am
Msg #151679

Sticks and stones . . .

For those who are claiming posts they make on the internet are NOT liable . . . here are over 11 million reasons why they you may want to think twice before hitting that <enter> key

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-10-10-internet-defamation-case_x.htm

Reply by Lee/AR on 10/11/06 10:03am
Msg #151712

Counterpoint.

If, as in this case, one party to a lawsuit does not show up in court nor are they represented by legal counsel, the other party automatically 'wins'. May not be right, but it is the way it works.