Synergistic calls out Audioholics

sbayne397 posts04-16-2021 10:09amGene contacted Synergistic Research’s dealers and distributors making claims about Ted and his products. Thats when he stepped over the line and is why he is being sued. It’s called Intentional Interference with a Business Relationship.

It must be obvious that this is not as simple as stating, "Intentional Interference ....".   For one, there likely will be a requirement to prove that the allegations are false. Otherwise every time some group tried to influence customers away from company for their business practices, they would be guilty of this, and sued. You will find it pretty hard to sue for simply communicating true information. So the question would come up, was what was communicated to these companies factual or not.


On the other hand, by Ted posting publicly, insinuating that his target was going to illegally use the GoFundMe funds, he would also be open for legal recourse.

To me, neither acted very professionally in this matter.

dletch2 - The whole basis is that Gene’s actions were intentionally done to influence SR’s business relationships. It’s a different area of the law from a libel claim. It doesn't focus on the "truth" of the matter but the motive behind the actions. 

I read one of the AGoners say he "snuck around and swapped this or swapped that to PROVE" how people were so gullible. THAT NEVER happened, EVER. NO one would let anyone near their gear for that.. NO ONE, pure and simple a BIG FAT LIE. BTW that guy quit posting, too.

No, but in my limited experience, he did post a video with recordings where he claimed a clear "audible" difference with HFTs and without.

Guess where he placed one of the HFTs?  Right next to the microphone. Not a foot away, I mean right next to it. Perhaps that was ignorance, but obviously that is going to impact what the microphone records. Someone analyzed it and showed a clear level difference from it.

Been to a demo once, and definite coaching on hearing changes, but I won't fault him, as that is common at audio shows, and county fair product sales.

sbayne398 posts04-16-2021 12:09pmdletch2 - The whole basis is that Gene's actions were intentionally done to influence SR's business relationships. It's a different area of the law from a libel claim.

Which again, is just like every time an activist group contacts companies and tries to get them to pull advertising or otherwise stop their business relationship with another entity. How often do you see those activist groups getting sued? The answer is never, except when they use false claims.


Tell me one company that does not attempt to influence their customers relationships with their competitors?  Heck, if it was as simple as that, virtual all competitive advertising would be banned. Remember the old Apple/Microsoft ads?   However, there is a fine line, and whether it was crossed, would be for the courts. We are not going to resolve that here. Personally, I see actions on both their parts that could get them into legal trouble. That is why it is always best to behave as a professional.

dletch2 - When Gene contacted SR’s dealers and distributors directly that is when it became actionable. Nothing to do with advertising, being an "activist" or arguing on chat boards.