Other Contributors

About Us

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« Insult to Injury | Main | January 2009 NHTSA and CPSC Recalls »

Friday, February 20, 2009



Hello everyone
Just recently I have discovered that this BS company is putting my name and address online without any authorization, now anyone with google can find my name from my address and vice versa. i have contacted them to remove the info but they declined forcing me to move on to the next step ie file an official complaint. Anyone had this problem too?


Before you judge the law firm (I'm no fan of lawyers either), please consider what Blockshopper does: they post your name, address and home purchase price on their website and link this to US Weekly-style stories. Yes, of course, home purchases are public information but you can't normally type a person's name in Google and figure out where they live (government websites allow you to search for a property and then lists the buyer(s), but NOT the other way around). Imagine if this happened to you while you were already being stalked... or if you had concerns about your home address being so prominently displayed on the internet? No, I agree with the law firm and if I had the $$ I would sue these pseudo-journalists too


Men in the mafia were rarely arrested for murder. They often were caught on tax evasion. Jones day was taking a similar approach.

Anyway, I hope you're happy Paul... read my story and think about who you are defending in the grand scheme of things. Who cares it was a BS trademark suit. These people need to be stopped.

Paul Levy

The document is available here:
The amicus brief is discussed at the end of the order.


Was there a written ruling in response to the Motion to Dismiss? It is hard to see why the court did not follow the argument in our amicus brief. If you can provide a link to the judge's ruling, I would appreciate. Thanks.

Paul Levy

Thanks for pointing out the broken link. It has been fixed. I do think that your proposal would be consistent with paragraph 1 of the settlement agreement.

Jay Levitt

The links to the settlement are broken (irony or art?). But if the settlement's as you say, couldn't Blockshopper get around the awkwardness of the literal-URL rule by simply creating a landing page for each of the Jones Day personnel they mention?

They could report on staffers exactly as they have done in the past. Clicking on Paul W. Schroeder's name could take you to a page on BlockShopper that says:

"Paul W. Schroeder is lead counsel at Jones Day. We are not affiliated with Jones Day, but you can read his corporate bio here:


If anything, this would give BlockShopper MORE opportunities to call attention to controversial actions by Jones Day; the obvious next step is to add a list of all articles mentioning Paul W. Schroeder to that landing page.

Not a bad way to aggregate outrage, yes? If that's what Jones Day wants, that's what Jones Day gets.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

September 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30