Nobody "owns customers." At most, somebody may own information about the customers. There are far too many unknown facts to determine who owns the customer information in this case. In the U.S., this is often a difficult legal issue and there is no universal answer. I have no idea what Mexican law says on this issue. It would be hasty to accuse anyone of wrongdoing without a full understanding of the facts and law.
Blue Angel Staff Changes
- Thread starter Brodydog
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
njones259
Contributor
There is a simple solution to this problem if you are unhappy with the situation don't open any more emails from Tres pelicans.I have been going to Coz for years usually 4 to 5 trips per years.I have only used 4 shops and can only say there is just 1 shop I wouldn't use again.I have my favorite divemasters but wouldn't change shops if one of them left.I dove with Jorge and BA for 8 years and think he is a great guy but one day walked down to scuba mau was treated great and decided to give them a try.I have been with them for years because of there business model and the way they treat their customers.
I think the problem is that either Jorge pulled out of the agreement or was offered a deal he couldn't refuse that left Tres Pelicans standing with their pants down.
I have checked out the Tres Pelicans facebook page and read their side of the story which everyone should do.The guy looks like a stand up guy and I will be sure to wish him well and stop by to meet him in October on my next visit to Coz.
I think the problem is that either Jorge pulled out of the agreement or was offered a deal he couldn't refuse that left Tres Pelicans standing with their pants down.
I have checked out the Tres Pelicans facebook page and read their side of the story which everyone should do.The guy looks like a stand up guy and I will be sure to wish him well and stop by to meet him in October on my next visit to Coz.
Mike
Contributor
I think you're stating the obvious in regard to owning customers, Chip.
I'd disagree this is a difficult legal issue in the US, in my opinion it's a very simple issue. It falls under many states Civil Code, under proprietary secrets, and damages are usually awarded based on the original employers damages and the infringing businesses enrichment. The legal remedy is called injunctive relief and there are tons of case law and history long established to base a case against.
The only tricky part of any of it if you want to call it that is #1 the customer list must qualify as a trade secret, (that's pretty easy) #2 the person doing the infringing must clearly solicit the customers on the list and not just announce their departure. However that line is easily crossed and is subject to interpretation and usually a court will side with the damaged business as long as it's clear the infringing party was doing so in the pursuit of financial gain. Announcing you are leaving and announcing you have a new business are clearly two different things and the latter certainly would qualify as solicitation. Damages could be easily proved simply by showing the loss of income from a previous customer booking with the new businesses instead of the old, and that person's statement that they booked with the new business as a result of being contacted by them would be the nail in the coffin.
Just do a quick google search of employee stealing employers customers and you'll find case after case of prosecutions.
This being the computer age an employer can also simply use the CFAA - computer fraud and abuse act to prosecute a former employee. All they have to do is show the employee took electronic data of value without permission of the company.
I'd disagree this is a difficult legal issue in the US, in my opinion it's a very simple issue. It falls under many states Civil Code, under proprietary secrets, and damages are usually awarded based on the original employers damages and the infringing businesses enrichment. The legal remedy is called injunctive relief and there are tons of case law and history long established to base a case against.
The only tricky part of any of it if you want to call it that is #1 the customer list must qualify as a trade secret, (that's pretty easy) #2 the person doing the infringing must clearly solicit the customers on the list and not just announce their departure. However that line is easily crossed and is subject to interpretation and usually a court will side with the damaged business as long as it's clear the infringing party was doing so in the pursuit of financial gain. Announcing you are leaving and announcing you have a new business are clearly two different things and the latter certainly would qualify as solicitation. Damages could be easily proved simply by showing the loss of income from a previous customer booking with the new businesses instead of the old, and that person's statement that they booked with the new business as a result of being contacted by them would be the nail in the coffin.
Just do a quick google search of employee stealing employers customers and you'll find case after case of prosecutions.
This being the computer age an employer can also simply use the CFAA - computer fraud and abuse act to prosecute a former employee. All they have to do is show the employee took electronic data of value without permission of the company.
Ms. Ann Thrope
Contributor
I'm sort of interpreting this like NJones (except that we ended up liking BA more than SM). It's not all that surprising to me that a popular DM like Jorge might want to run his own show--or not. Why and how that has all played out is more their business than ours, as much as many of us would like to know more. I guess the upshot for those of us who like to stay at the Blue Angel is that our next visit there won't be all that different than our last (except for any pricing and meal changes). And I guess there's a new dive shop in town, which may or may not end up being a very good one.
The whole thing about Jeanie's arrangement with the hotel and dive op just makes me wonder about why many Cozumel dive ops have done business the way they have--though things appear to be changing. Is it sort of a pre- or early-internet legacy? We dealt with Jeanie through a couple of hotel changes and had no complaints (I knew she could also book us into other hotels when BA was full so always thought maybe she had some sort of preferred but not exclusive relationship with the BA hotel). And I remember when we used to use Dive With Martin (and I still would use them if I were staying near their shop), they at some point had a U.S. person with whom you could pre-book and pre-pay for dives. I think a few others did as well. It always surprised me a little, in the early days of email, that sending a query or reservation directly to the dive shop seemed not to be the most obvious way to make contact in advance. I always wondered if that was for the convenience of U.S. clients who didn't want to just show up and hope for space on the boat? Was there some financial or credit-card-transaction advantage for the dive shops (as well as for customers) to pay in U.S. dollars on U.S. soil? Was it largely about language? I'm assuming the rise of online agencies like Orbitz, along with other technology, has made it harder for independent U.S. agents/contractors/whatever to profitably do what they have traditionally done, and less necessary for Mexico-based businesses to use their services. Just wondering about it all, in sort of a "How Things Work" kind of way.
I know this is a wee bit off topic, but it seems the topic is getting beat up a little. We've been treated well by all of the parties we've ever met.
The whole thing about Jeanie's arrangement with the hotel and dive op just makes me wonder about why many Cozumel dive ops have done business the way they have--though things appear to be changing. Is it sort of a pre- or early-internet legacy? We dealt with Jeanie through a couple of hotel changes and had no complaints (I knew she could also book us into other hotels when BA was full so always thought maybe she had some sort of preferred but not exclusive relationship with the BA hotel). And I remember when we used to use Dive With Martin (and I still would use them if I were staying near their shop), they at some point had a U.S. person with whom you could pre-book and pre-pay for dives. I think a few others did as well. It always surprised me a little, in the early days of email, that sending a query or reservation directly to the dive shop seemed not to be the most obvious way to make contact in advance. I always wondered if that was for the convenience of U.S. clients who didn't want to just show up and hope for space on the boat? Was there some financial or credit-card-transaction advantage for the dive shops (as well as for customers) to pay in U.S. dollars on U.S. soil? Was it largely about language? I'm assuming the rise of online agencies like Orbitz, along with other technology, has made it harder for independent U.S. agents/contractors/whatever to profitably do what they have traditionally done, and less necessary for Mexico-based businesses to use their services. Just wondering about it all, in sort of a "How Things Work" kind of way.
I know this is a wee bit off topic, but it seems the topic is getting beat up a little. We've been treated well by all of the parties we've ever met.
cbm32
Contributor
I think that many people prefer to deal with an agency or entity of some kind in their home country if possible. In fact, there is a pretty good chance I will start representing a resort or two in Fiji in the near future if I am satisfied that their operations have become dependable enough that I am willing to be linked with them. Some factors that I think contribute to this are time zone changes, exchange rates, language problems at times, and simply a feeling that one of your countrymen may well be more interested in doing right by you than someone from a different county thousands of miles away. Also, I think that there may be an easier means of legal redress if something goes wrong if you have dealt with someone on your own soil.
I am not a lawyer and cant speak for everyone but those are some of the factors that come to mind for me.
Chip16:
I couldn't agree more. Why is everyone sighting US Law? If a Mexican law wasn't broken then this is not an issue, if it was then I believe it's up to Blue Angel to take the proper legal action if they want too.
Either way it is just interesting reading to me and has no influence on the dive op I will use.
Mike
Contributor
I have posted it at least once in this thread - the law here regarding proprietary information is the same, and can actually be punished criminally here. It is not at all taken lightly in MX.
Anyone that truly thinks there was an agreement for the client list to go with a former employee is foolish!!!! It is a valuable asset of the business!
Jeannie can spin it and abbreviate her story any way she wants to justify her actions, but it does not change the ethical aspect and most likely not the legal aspects either! The "travel agency" was set up under Alejandra's ownership for the business.
And my other question is:
If she is so sure she OWNS this information, then why not own it proudly? Why say she only planned to use it once? And she has been functioning as a travel agent and booking agent for all of these years, why were the website and URL only purchased in March of this year?
Last edited:
driftin' by
Contributor
... and now the plot thickens. Well, not really. Maybe I missed it, but I never heard Eva complain about the contacts being taken and now Jeanie and justified her rights to the list. I for one didn't realize that she did bookings for other resorts. She was just the one that responded when I inquired the first time. I even recall that I quipped to my wife that her name didn't seem very "authentic" in a Mexican sense. Just seems to be the case of a bunch of busy-bodies with nothing else better to do, myself included.
What I find interesting is that when people jumped to conclusion and assumed the contact information was "lifted", "poached" or "stolen" no one took issue with the fact that the information was not secured by the rightful owner.
What I find interesting is that when people jumped to conclusion and assumed the contact information was "lifted", "poached" or "stolen" no one took issue with the fact that the information was not secured by the rightful owner.
Similar threads
