Shawn Hogan (Owner of DP) Is Getting Sued For Cooking Stuffing

Read the court documents before making stupid statements like this fgllc. It's not just Shawn/DP getting sued, and it's nothing to do with the sites that get sold here - they've made some very serious claims that have nothing to do with turnkey sites.


Is anybody from DP in that area that can attend the trial? I'd be curious to see what happens there.

 

Maybe someone could bug Shawn to work on the DP forums.

 

suprised this is still up

 

How would it looked if this thread got locked? Of course it's still up. Shawn Hogan stuffed this forum with cookies and now he's getting sued. So what? No pain no game! That's how it is when you're doing blackhat, greed will imprison us all.

No matter the outcome, DigitalPoint forums will continue to operate so don't think much about Shawn Hogan, he's got lawyers to do thinking for him. I bet you got stuffed before. It's like electricity - you can't destroy it, it can only change form.

 

@Christian Little

Thanks for quoting the post but not actually reading it.

The comment refers to eBay's motivation for suing DP. It has nothing to do with the particulars of the DP case. If eBay can successfully defame the DP brand, DP loses forum posters and traffic - eBay wins. Successful niche exploitations and marketing ventures (such as DP) are based on symbiotic relationships with customers. Once this is ruined, profits tank.

The particulars of the lawsuit don't even matter. Why they sued matters. Take a second to see the big picture here and not just what they are putting in front of you to read. It's about money and competition, not cookie stuffing/black hat. If the claims are true, it's a double win for eBay. 1. They look as if they are making an ethical move banning affiliates that are shady and 2. They hurt (or eliminate) the competition.

If he (and the others named in the lawsuit) had been any other affiliate(s) they'd just have been suspended. It's just a means to an end for eBay. Total PR win for eBay if the lawsuit is found in their favor.

 

I second fgllc. Law suits, like this case, is mainly about money and probably fame. So, just wait and see which will emerge the winner.

 

All I know is you all know nothing and if you think you know, I know you don't know, and knowing those that think they know, but really don't know, I know that what you know and don't know means you really don't know what I know, even though what I know is not what others know that really do know which is more than you or I know so please don't act as if you do know when you really don't know.

Know what I mean?

 

fuck it, let the shit lie as it will. If the DP shawn whateverhisname did what is implied he deserves to fry

 

"Well, you never really know, but when they know, you know, y'know?" ~ Crush the Turtle

 

lol that is very one strong statement mate

 

Geez, How did you know that?

 

drug-addicted mod detected!
lol

 

Even if I did know something, which I don't, I sure wouldn't let on as if to what I knew. Then I'd have to bat away all the AITH's asking questions like: how do you know? when did you know? and why is it exactly that you are in the know?



Well, Your Honor. We've plenty of hearsay and conjecture. Those are KINDS of evidence. ~ Lionel H.

 

No; I suspect he got banned (IntellectToday) for selling dodgy links! I bought a few from him for an agreed period (a year) and the next month he removed them all! they were on there about 20 days!

read his post about slamming other people (above) it is a joke! a true and annoying case of hypocrite! and not practicing that preached.

I have started a paypal dispute against (IntellectToday)! him being banned to prevent others being conned by him could not make me happier

however on this thread, and in my experience of this forum has been that of a lot of such like criminals (as above IntellectToday) and that is bound to have an adverse effect on the forum itself and obviously this reflects on the owners, I have a feeling this might not be directly associated! and innocent until found guilty and all that......

paul

 

@fgllc,

I think you mised the point. As a former law student I read the pleadings and understand them entirely. Of course it's about money! It's a Torts case. Your assertion that if it happened to someone little they would probably have been suspended...is wrong! They probably wouldn't have gotten sued (because they're too small and it wouldn't be worth the legal cost), but the definetely would have gotten banned. The fact that Ebay is suing the 3 defendants is because they have been substanstially (monetarily) injured. In addition, the defendants have access to tens of thousands of members by which they could implement their scheme on. Ebay is in their full rights; and if the allegations are true, Shawn and the other defendants will have an even bigger worries:

1. RICO - Both Criminal and Civil Reprocussions (Think Al Capone...he did more time for RICO violations then he ever would have for murder, drugs, etc.)
2. Class Action - How many 1000's of people over 4 years would have been affected by this scheme? How many of those people lost commissions who could have recived them? If this goes to trial, you better believe during the discovery process the bean counters will find out and crush them.

If they are smart, they will settle out of court ASAP and pray the plea doesn't include jail time. Ebay is very specific in the pleadings as to how it happened, how long it's been going on, and their communication and response from Shawn. In other words, all their ducks are lined up in a row as they have been tarcking all the defendants! But don't take my word for it, read the pleadings for yourself here: http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal...206526/1/0.pdf

 

I guess you don't read very well.

First, there are more than 3 defendants. Second, this is not a criminal RICO action and jail time is not even a consideration in this present case. Third, you have passed judgment (suggesting the defendants settle to avoid jail) before you have even seen the response from the defendants. Fourth, you say that ebay has been very specific in their pleading (which is required) and yet not one piece of evidence is before the court to allow you to conclude they have anything to support their pleadings.

And you don't seem to know how to paste a working link.

 

19 Knows equals a ~know

Thus the negation is For all knows, there is an unknown, such that there exists a known for every unknown. Ya know? Logic isn't that confusing

(Yes I know what you mean, its ridiculous that people are quick to judge Shawn when they don't even know what the hell he did in the first place)

 

Either way they are still breaking the law which makes them criminals.

 

No it doesn't. Your a criminal if you break criminal laws. Just because someone sues and wins you doesn't make you a felon or anything of the sort. They are two totally separate things.