![]() |
The AFU and Urban Legend Archive Products amway vs pg
|
![]() |
From: philo@radix.net (Philo)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: The Proctor-Gamble UL is making the rounds again...
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 17:13:07 GMT
On 13 Dec 1996 10:49:02 -0500, stevens@longwood.cs.ucf.edu (John Stevens) wrote:
>
>This correlation was my first thought also, but I wonder what data/cites
>could be produced to support it?
THE PROCTOR & GAMBLE COMPANY and The Proctor & Gamble Distributing
Company,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Randy L. HAUGEN, et al., Defendants.
No. CIV. 1:95-CV-0094W.
United States District Court,
D. Utah.
Dec. 3, 1996.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs allege the following facts which, although disputed by Defendants, are assumed by the court to be true for purposes of this motion.
Randy L. Haugen is an "Executive Diamond" level distributor of Amway products and a developer of Amway business in the distribution chain of Amway. [FN3] Haugen has established a network and chain of an estimated 100,000 other distributors of Amway products throughout Utah, Nevada, Texas, Mexico, and Canada. Rodger D. Patton, Jeffery G. Musgrove, Steven E. Brady, Stephen L. Bybee, and Ted Randal Walker are Amway distributors in Haugen's distribution network. Haugen, Patton, Musgrove, Brady, Bybee, and Walker will be referred to as the "Distributor Defendants."
Amway sells to its distributors a communication system known as Amvox. Amway has the capability to receive messages on the Amvox system from distributors and to send messages to all distributors who subscribe to Amvox.
In or about April and May 1995, the Distributor Defendants circulated and published through the Amvox system and other media false and defamatory written and oral statements regarding Plaintiffs. The statements, made with actual knowledge of their falsity or with malicious and reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity, associate Plaintiffs with satanism and describe Plaintiffs' "moon and stars" trademark as a satanic symbol. The statements further promote a boycott of Plaintiffs' products and the purchase of competing Amway products.
The publications by the Distributor Defendants are not the first such publications propagated and circulated by Amway distributors. In 1991 Plaintiffs obtained a judgment against two Amway distributors for spreading rumors linking Plaintiffs' trademark with satanism, and Plaintiffs have directly informed Amway various times in the 1980s and 90s about such rumors being spread by other Amway distributors. Despite this information, Amway has done little or nothing to educate its distributors about such rumors or prevent these rumors from being spread to the marketplace by their distributors.
*2 Based on these allegations, Plaintiffs brought suit against Defendants for defamation, common-law unfair competition, violation of the Utah Truth in Advertising Act, violation of the Lanham Act, tortious interference with economic relations, negligent supervision, and vicarious liability. In their motions, Defendants seek to have dismissed counts two (common-law unfair competition), three (violation of the Utah Truth in Advertising Act), and five (tortious interference with economic relations)
Philo "Lucky Charms" NLN
philo@radix.net
-Quarterflash
|
Any proceeds (net proceeds from merchandise sales) from TAFKAC solely
benefit The Chuck Reed Fund.
Copyright Information http://tafkac.org/ |