Make your legal team restrain themselves when they're trying to silence bloggers who are trying to help people buy from Dell.

June 15, 2007

401 Votes

Status: Implemented

Promote

Yesterday Dell sent the following letter to a blog that was giving advice on how to better order from the confusing Dell web site (like clarifying pros and cons of when you should go to the Small Business vs Home Office sections; and when you might do even better going to a Dell Kiosk- which Dell's own web site never makes clear). Rather than a take down notice from Legal, a polite email from Marketing with corrections to the inaccurate parts and specific requests to remove the confidential information would have been:

Better for the Blogger - because he wouldn't feel threatened.
Better for Dell - because the article never would have been so widely publicized (I learned of it only because of the takedown notice).
Better for Dell Customers - because the rest of the non-confidential information in the article could still help them.

- - - - - - - - - -
from Tracy Holland
to ben@consumerist.com
date Jun 14, 2007 4:39 PM
subject Posting by former Dell employee

Dear Ben,

Please remove the posting located at the following

http://consumerist.com/consumer/insiders/22-confessions-of-a-former-dell-sale...<contains information that is confidential and proprietary to Dell.

While not all aspects of the entry are accurate, ostensibly an ex-employee posted Dell's confidential information in violation of his or her employment agreement and confidentiality obligations (which prohibit the disclosure of such information both during and after the period of employment).

We would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter. Please confirm that the posting has been removed by the end of the day tomorrow.

Thank you, and please give me a call if you would like to discuss further.

Tracy Holland

Tracy J. Holland
Counsel
Dell Inc.
- - - - - - - - - -

While some of the information wasn't correct; the blogger has been continually updating the article fixing inaccuracies as they're pointed out to him. Your legal team also referred to "confidential information" but never specified what was the offending confidential information that should be removed. It's a bit hard to guess what parts of that posting might have been considered confidential; because it seems like just about all the info in the article can be found (just with difficulty) browsing the Dell web site and Kiosks.

Ideas for your legal team:
* For the case of this article - point out the "confidential" information (if there really is any) and I'm confident the blogger will remove that confidential information while keeping the rest of the helpful advice (which helps your customers buy Dells) up there.
* In general - try to restrain yourselves from legal threats on Bloggers. It would probably have been nicer if someone from Dell Marketing asked the person to correct things; and the whole thing would have probably gone away quietly -- instead of being very visible on many high profile places on the internet and on mailing lists now.
DELL/ Status Update
We hold ourselves at Dell and all our employees to high ethical standards and believe ex-employees have an obligation to uphold those standards. We live and learn in this new world of blogs and appreciate your suggestion.

401 Votes | 32 Comments | Report Abuse

Comments Page (1 of 4)

1 2 3 4 Next

Please login to IdeaStorm to post a comment.

    Comments :
     
  • Jul 14, 2008     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    The moral of this story is an increasingly important one that too few companies seem to have learned: Mess with the blogosphere in ways that are heavyhanded and uncalled for, especially when the blogger is doing his or her best to keep everything on the level, and you risk bringing the collective wrath of the internet upon yourself. People have eyes and ears and voices, much more so in today's internet age that at any other time in history.
  •  
  • Jun 26, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    Having just read about the legal letter hubbub, and typing this note on a 2-year old Insprion 9300 that runs perfect, I am disappointed and slightly embarassed to own a Dell product. I only found this letter because I was browing Dell.com looking for a Latitude D630 for my business, and now I am rethinking my decision. Is this what Dell is coming to? (oh by the way, I am reading this on a 2405FP LCD, and looking at my 5 year old Dimension 8200 with 1901FP LCD/loaded to the gills on the other side of my desk).
  •  
  • Jun 26, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    Mistern - not sure there's an exact size measurement for a small city but Dell has around 90,000 employees worldwide.
  •  
  • Jun 22, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    Nice plan. This way, customers will be helped when buying Dell systems. Otherwise, it would be the more confusing for customers.
  •  
  • Jun 20, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    tfl: The lawyers are too important too be fired. Maybe source them out?
  •  
  • Jun 20, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    Dell, for all your steps in the right direction in regard to reputation online, you still continue to bungle things.
  •  
  • Jun 20, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    I find it amazing that Dell could be so stupid as to issue this take-down.

    I've been a loyal Dell custoemer since the late 1980's and have never seen such a bad idea. Someone should be fired - preferably the lawyers.
  •  
  • Jun 20, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    ddschamp: The reason I think it'd be nice is if Dell explains how they think they "goofed" is because it matters if Dell's lesson was "let's not threating bloggers with bluffs when we don't have cause; but keep doing it when we do" or if it was "let's only bluff blogs without counsel" or "hey, from now on let's be more open with the community". By saying what the goof was it would give more confidence that they're cooperating more.
  •  
  • Jun 19, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    I'm feeling bluff on this one. Misstep was to validate the article by ordering a takedown. Damage control, AKA "bluff," was to let sleeping dogs lie and change your internal policy to nullify the sensitive information that was "leaked." Such as more stringent controls on returns. Offering surprise discounts. Etc.
  •  
  • Jun 19, 2007     Comment Link

    Report Abuse

    @jmxz So what you want really then is to goose neck at a traffic wreck? I'm confussed as to the reason you want to hear what an ex employee has stated? I would also like to know how that communication got out in the first place as usually such emails are confidential.

1 2 3 4 Next