Robert Parker is stifling communication about… Robert Parker

[DavidG]

His attorneys have sent Todd French at WineBerserkers and Tyler Colman at Dr. Vino letters demanding that they remove content that was critical of Parker and that was copied and posted from the eRP board. They claimed copyright infringement. I am not a lawyer, but I suspect a pretty good fair use defense could have been mounted had there been a desire… and the resources… to do so. Fair use allows copying of material for critique - not entire articles but is a post on a message board an article? But I doubt that Todd French or Tyler Colman wish to get into a legal tit-for-tat with the much deeper-pocketed Robert Parker. So the material has been removed.

I am one of several that have copied posts and TNs here from the Parker board and elsewhere without consequences. Is this because we are below the radar or because the material was not embarrassing to Parker? I understand the legal theory in trademark law that says if you don't defend everywhere you may be at risk. Perhaps that principle applies to copyright as well. Regardless, this comes across as bullying, plain and simple. I can't imagine that the copied material would cause potential customers to forego subscribing based on free access to the content on a different site. More likely, the copied material would discourage people from subscribing based on the crassness of Parker's postings.

[Tom In DC]

Yet another interesting decision by the Wine Advocate. Bob is apparently not an adherent to the old "any publicity is good publicity" saw. I would think that even the negative re-posts might cause folks to subscribe to see what all the hubbub is about.

If I subscribed for a month, copied some of my own posts from back in the day, and posted them somewhere else do you think they would enforce their intellectual property rights? I recall that a lot of trademark/IP law requires the holder to chase down all of the infringements, lest something happen like "Kleenex" slipping into the lexicon as a synonym for tissue.

And given the ownership of the Advocate these days, enforcement of any IP issues seems absurd...

[RDD]

Doesn't surprise me.
Criticism was never tolerated when the board was open to the public.

[JimHow]

Do he and Squires still have their site together?

[Rudi Finkler]

No clue, Jim, but it is always a pleasure to watch Parker go on self-dismantle mode.

[DavidG]

Their site? Yes.

Their s#it? Apparently not.

[Gerry M.]

He's dished it out for so long against others with no regard for anyone elses feelings but apparently his own thin skin is once again showing as it did when he took the down the public forum on his own site. He can dish it out but can't take it. It's really kind of sad that a man who contributed so much to broadening the base of wine appreciation is now seamingly headed towards a death spiral.

[AlohaArtakaHoundsong]

Yeah, he's a regular Miki Dora, except for the sell-out.

[JimHow]

Lol.

[hautbrionlover]

I don't think that the web site owns the copyright in the posts of others, unless there is some agreement by which subscribers/members assign the copyright in their own written expression to the site.

[JimHow]

It is so silly that Parker would do such a thing, get lawyers involved, etc.
So somebody posted something unflattering about him on the internet?
Wow! The horror!
I'm sure his reputation is RUINED!
<rolls eyes>

[DavidG]

PARKER posted an unflattering screed that was copied and pilloried on a couple of other sites. The lawyer's demand was that Parker's writing should be removed as the copyright belonged to Parker.

So the original posts with Parker's words have been replaced by an announcement that his lawyers demanded it be removed, but all the ensuing criticism remains. And has been further amplified by the legal bullying.

[Gerry M.]

Its gotten to the point where nobody talks or cares about his rating of wine any more but just whatever his latest silly rant