Posted by TDI_2 on May 01, 2002 at 10:24:03:
In Reply to: Re: Here's the links Chris. Calm down, ok? And quit calling me a liar. posted by Chuck Tribolet on May 01, 2002 at 09:41:36:
I agree, that it looks like a pretty good chart.
I noticed that the conclusions/opinion section was heavily weighted in favor of YMCA Scuba at the end, and therefore that makes it seem like an advertisment or info-mercial to me, on YMCA Scuba's behalf, since I can see some self interest coming out of the conclusions section in view of the stated diving credentials of the author.
I am not a YMCA diver, yet I am aware that YMCA as well as NAUI both encourage their instructors to "exceed" the minimum standards that are published, and therefore several YMCA and NAUI instructors indeed do spend more "sessions" than required by the stated minimum standards. The comparison chart does not make that extremely obvious, and if it tries, I didn't see where.
If there is a difference between YMCA, NAUI, and PADI, then that would be it, and that would have little or nothing to do with published minimum standards. Again, it all seems to harken back to advertising, not defamation slander or injury.
PADI seems to be firing a shot across Eddie's bow for some reason. They would not be paying their lawyers to take this approach, if there wasn't some message that they wanted to convey.
Internet law is still quite new, and the First Amendment protections to publish a list or comparison and to state your conclusions about it seems fairly appropriate. Newspaper reporters typically use aliases rather than their own names to protect them from irate readers and from frivilous lawsuits.
PADI may feel that Eddie's website has become very successful and cannot be ignored. Suing him would seem like a backhanded compliment. PADI is rich and large enough to where Eddie's house and car and bank account cannot possibly make much difference to them if they were successful with a judgement. So that makes me wonder what the shot across the bow is all about?
It would almost have been more dignified for the giant world-wide #1 scuba agency to simply ignor Divernet.
I still wonder about the unusual legal procedure. Normally in a civil action you must bring your complaint in the jurisdiction of the residence of the defendant/respondent to meet the jurisdiction requirement. The internet makes things foggy, but that is normally the requirement. What has Orange County got to do with anything?
I also wonder how other web site owners are going to be affected in the future, since internet law is still being formulated, as we speak.
It seems to me anyone can publish a comparison chart on the internet, and state their own opinions about it, without violating civil law. That is a jury's call, of course, after a judge has resolved the jurisdiction question.
I will close this with some nice things to say about PADI. Most non-PADI instructors that I have spoken with agree that PADI's written materials for scuba instruction are the best that there is. And even the Divernet article points out the perception that PADI's teaching procedures are extremely uniform all around the globe, which has its advantages for dive students who want to do their pool work in City A and their ocean work in Resort B.
I hope I don't get petitioned by YMCA and NAUI now for saying that on the internet! :)
Good luck trying to find me. There are close to 100,000 TDI divers in the world, and I am just one of many.
Post a Followup