Court Shuts Down Yellow Page Websites for Bilking $14M

26 November 2013 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

US small businesses and churches were targeted by websites based in Montreal, Canada and as a result were bilked out of $14 million .  After receiving more than 13,000 consumer complaints the FTC filed a Complaint against Modern Technology Inc. and 14 other related businesses (incorporated in Wyoming, Nevada, New York, Delaware, and Vermont) and the FTC alleged among other things:

…the defendants operated from Montreal, using corporate shells and mail drops in the U.S. to hide their actual location. 

Typically, they made phone calls pretending they were verifying contact information to update or confirm existing directory listings. 

In some cases, the defendants said they were calling in response to a cancellation request, and asked to verify the organization’s contact information to confirm the cancellation. 

In fact, the defendants had no prior relationship with the consumers.

The bills sent by the defendants averaged $499.99 or more and had a “walking fingers” image often associated with a local yellow pages directory.  Some consumers paid, thinking someone in their organization had ordered these listings. 

Other consumers paid after the defendants used partially recorded phone conversations with consumers who had verified their contact information to convince them that they had a binding oral contract with the defendants…

Based on the FTC Complaint US District Judge Virginia Kendall in Chicago issued a Temporary Restraining Order on November 18, 2013 and set a hearing for December 2, 2013 for the defendants to show cause why a Temporary Injunction should not be issued.

It will be interesting to follow to see if the FTC can recover any of the $14 million and how this case may impact the FTC’s enforcement against other bad Internet players.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services

Insights

CMS Proposes Enhanced Scrutiny over Medicaid Supplemental Payments
20 November 2019
Health Care Law Today
The Purpose of a Corporation
November 2019
Legal News: Business Law
Should This Be a "Mobility" Industry Blog?
19 November 2019
Dashboard Insights
Data Processing Patent Eligibility: Federal Circuit Finds Claims Eligible in KPN v. Gemalto
19 November 2019
IP Litigation Current
PATH Summit 2019
18-20 December 2019
Arlington, VA
Madison CLE Days
18-19 December 2019
Madison, WI
MedTech Impact Expo & Conference
13-15 December 2019
Las Vegas, NV
HFMA MA-RI Annual Compliance Update
12 December 2019
Boston, MA