FSS is reckless in making accusations which do not meet any reasonable standard of "ordinary care." There is a complete lack of verifiable, independent evidence. Other websites and Google posts do not constitute evidence.

It should be noted that the First Amendment does not apply to commercial speech — which this is.

For reasons that remain inexplicable, Mr. Scoville has contacted the employers, friends, relatives and neighbors of his targets, making inflammatory, inaccurate, unsupportable, unproven and hyperbolic accusations. Often these targets are in Canada or at some distance from Mr. Scoville making relief through litigation economically unviable.

The method for selecting FSS targets is entirely unknown. What is known is that Mr. Scoville will attack anyone who dares to question his methods. Politely asking Mr. Scoville to prove one of his allegations is almost certain to make the questioner a target. Targets can expect to be recklessly and maliciously castigated on the FSS web site and in numerous Usenet news groups. Mr. Scoville has been known to harass the target's ISP for imaginary abuses. If the ISP does not comply with Scoville's demands then they often become targets.

To promote his site, Mr. Scoville (using many different identities) has posted thousands of commercial messages to Usenet news groups. These contain a bit of inflammatory content with a link to the web site to get more information. The posting of commercial messages to some Usenet news groups is in violation of their charter and is usually considered to be spam. Mr. Scoville has also engaged in posting a multitude of substantively similar messages which is also considered to be spam.

Moreover, these messages are misleading "bait & switch" since there is no mention that someone has to PAY FSS for the privilege of reading the information.

To attract paying customers to the site, FSS has sent — and may continue to send — email notices to people about whom speeches are written. While Mr. Scoville doesn't get it, that is spam. It is unsolicited; it is commercial and it is email — or "UCE".

There is no procedure, whatsoever, for a target to review, correct or request removal of inaccurate information. There is no standard for accuracy nor independent confirmation. Indeed, people who have complained have found that their access to the web site has been blocked.

These issues seem to be the result of a flawed business model. It seems improbable that people will pay to read the rants of others. There is ample opinion expressed on the Internet available for free. Mr. Scoville must continue to spam usenet news groups and to send spam emails in order to have even a remote potential of driving paying customers to his site.

AHBL's block of FSS was in-policy. The case was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. Should it be refiled, it will likely be dismissed on the merits.