Sharkbait420 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 I know it is hard to believe but I was at Pets a Warehouse in NY. The stores name one forums is FAVIAFREAK, don't support this abuse. I went to PetsWarehouse and was shocked at what I saw. A near 3 foot shark in a 72 gallon tank. The sharl was cut up and the cuts were infected. The shark also had gill flukes or a similar parasite. I wanted to buy it but the employee told me $250. The employee told me the shark was in perfect health and needed a little melaflex. He did use the work perfect. That shark in perfect health should not be over $150. I wanted to buy it but did not want to support a store taphat abuses fish like this. That shark is destined to die prematurely if he does not get a better home. The condition that shark was in the store should sell it at cost and be happy if someone buys it. It is hard enough selling large sharks. Selling ones in that condition is near impossible. What is even more disturbing is that I posted this on my local fourm and some of the moderators are covering it up and claiming that the shark is in great care. Pictures to come. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vFoF6vaFWSQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pxIFIj1f9Nk Link to comment
Sharkbait420 Posted January 31, 2015 Author Share Posted January 31, 2015 A interesting article It’s the story of a multi-million dollar lawsuit that has transformed a sleepy online community of aquatic plant gardeners into a hotbed of accusations of libel, conspiracy, defamation, computer hacking, infringement on freedom of speech and even death threats. The plaintiff in the case of Robert Novak vs. APD List Members, filed last May in a federal court in New York, seeks damages of more than $15 million. The FBI has even been notified, although there is no public evidence to date that it is conducting an investigation. “I’ve been an attorney for over 20 years, and I have rarely seen anything that’s as frivolous as this is,” says John Benn, a lawyer and aquarist in Sheffield, Ala., who collects monies for the legal defense of the defendants named in the case. So far, says Benn, the defense fund has raised more than $14,000 from online sympathizers around the globe. But now the defense fund itself has become a legal target — and that raises questions of just what kind of comments are protected speech on the Internet, and how far a company can go in attempting to guard its trademarks. For Benn, the lawsuit may be frivolous, aimed at stifling criticism, but for Robert Novak, the founder and owner of PetsWarehouse.com, the reputation of a company is at stake. The aquatic plant spat may be just another online brush fire, but the issues at the heart of the struggle reach far. The Internet makes it easy to express your opinion; anyone who’s ever been caught in the cross fire of an all-out flame war knows that. But does it make it too easy? And when litigation follows flaming words, how far will an online community go to fight back? http://www.salon.com/2002/04/04/aquatic_plants/ Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.