Robyn Openshaw, 'The Green Smoothie Girl,' Threatening SLAPP Suits Over Mediocre Reviews
from the don't-do-this dept
Various health fads come and go. One particular one that I guess has been around for a bit is the idea of drinking "green smoothies." This was made popular by Robyn Openshaw, who is called "The Green Smoothie Girl" and has written a bunch of books, all around her views on approaches to losing weight and health, including the aforementioned green smoothies, and various "detox" plans. There's also something about "vibrations," but that's about as deep into the weeds as I was going to get on her views on staying healthy.
I have no opinion on whether or not any of that stuff works or is good for you (do your own research!) but it does appear that the Green Smoothie Girl, Robyn Openshaw, is not at all happy about negative reviews. People who merely posted on Facebook saying that Openshaw's claims were "unproven" among other things, started receiving threatening messages demanding that these mildly negative reviews be taken down or they would face lawsuits:
Is it actually slander/bullying to post a negative review of a company on FB? I got this very long message on FB Messenger from a person who isn't even a lawyer...I have never cyber-bullied anyone, so I am inclined to take no action whatsoever. Any advice gladly taken pic.twitter.com/83fPyLvRaO
— Sarah Jane (@nurse_nomad) December 6, 2019
Someone at least claiming to work for Robyn was contacting people with ridiculously baseless threats. The threats are so ridiculous as to be laughable:
Sarah Jane, my employer is Robyn Openshaw, Influence Brands, and GreenSmoothieGirl.
You have until midnight tonight, to remove your negative reviews on her various companies. We have screenshotted your slander and cyberbullying and will engage our attorneys and PI's to send you a FORMAL C&D, should you not wish to comply, as well as file a lawsuit against you which will include damages to her....
[....]
... as we work together to gather information and file complaints, as well as court costs, in our state (not yours.)
As soon as your name is in the lawsuit for damages, slander, and cyberbullying with charges in all applicable case law, we will hold you accountable for those charges as lon gas it takes. You can probably infer that this will be very expensive.
Most of that is word salad, with a few nonsense legal terms tossed in for shits and giggles. But, it's a nice touch to flat out admit in the threat to file a SLAPP suit that you're doing it because it will "be very expensive." Good to admit that that's your intention upfront, right?
I would imagine this will end up in the media as well.
You don't say...
Should you choose to delete all your false reviews, we will not subpoena Facebook for all your information and pursue legal action against you. We will just watch your actions in case you do any more, and at that point we will take ALL of the evidence to the authorities.
The authorities? I love legal threats that don't know the difference between civil complaints and criminal charges, but, hey. It all sounds vaguely about the law.
— Sarah Jane (@nurse_nomad) December 6, 2019
There are some true classics in here.
I highly recomment you take quick action to remove the negative reviews, as they legally qualify under many laws/statutes as slander and bullying, and the law holds you accountable for the financial and other losses businesses incur due to your actions--even the time we employees spend having to document your actions and pursue you, will be collected in a court judgment against you.
That review must have been pretty bad, right? Nope:
All I said was they make unproven claims. No rude language.
— Sarah Jane (@nurse_nomad) December 6, 2019
Since then First Amendment lawyer Ari Cohn has been cataloging more and more insanity around these threats. We've heard of some unique interpretations of Section 230 in the past, but this might be the craziest:
BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE:
She isn't liable for what she says on her pages, but YOU might be! pic.twitter.com/mMFg9rNaoV
— Ari Cohn (@AriCohn) December 6, 2019
That includes an image first of someone asking for info on a commenter be sent to Openshaw so "he can be served legally and peacefully" and then shows Openshaw stating the following, which appears to likely be her mangling how Section 230 works:
Lannette Syck also attorney confirms I am not liable for what I say here. This is my page.
They are the ones out of bounds. They come on my page and the pages of my business.
Um... what?
And, of course, it quickly came out that they were sending these kinds of messages to others who wrote negative reviews as well. And, as we all know by now, you're not doing vexatious legal threats correctly if you don't eventually get around to doing the RICO. And I think we can say mission accomplished on that one:
There’s even more—she’s claiming RICO! pic.twitter.com/YDE80YF2bz
— Eric (@NamfohCire) December 7, 2019
That's a message, direct from Openshaw's account (rather than an "employee") saying:
She wasnt a commenter. She committed felony tortious interference and RICO.
let her know it's slander and tortious interference when I can prove she's not a customer or follower and she was told to go attack my page by pharma mafia troll.
Clueless trolls don't know c&d is a warning.
Should they want to remove the fraud review before they get served.
They can disregard, their choice, and get served.
All the fake reviews posted within 48 hours of supertroll BKM telling others to attack my page, plus tagging her troll friends right here on my page to go post fake reviews.
We have all the screen shots.
Felony convictions are a matter of public record and can keep you from getting a job or a loan.
Felony convictions? For posting a mildly negative review? That's not how any of this works.
Also, she seems to think that violating Facebook's terms of service is the same as violating the law. And cyber consultants something something something.
Robyn thinks she can sue people for violating Facebook's ToS and she has CYBER CONSULTANTS. #greensmoothiegirlhttps://t.co/W5AbUdlbo6
— Ari Cohn (@AriCohn) December 7, 2019
That's another message from Robyn's own account:
[Redacted], would you like to take your troll posts down--on your page, and the comment on mine--or would you prefer my cyber security specialist serve you at your work with my attorneys' C&D and lawsuit for defamation and violating Facebook's bullying policies, and you have violated both--which are here:
* descriptions of photos that degrade someone's appearance or character.
* targeting someone with threatsYour choice. Let me know by midnight tonight, because I have some legal actions to initiate tomorrow. If there is a cyber bullying lawsuit, we will seek all my legal and cyber consultant fees.
Sounds credible!
And apparently, RICO isn't enough, because eventually, you need to take it up a notch. To terrorism.
HATE SPEECH AND TERRORISM! pic.twitter.com/o7FojoQYNY
— Ari Cohn (@AriCohn) December 7, 2019
That appeared to be a bit of an "airing of grievances" by Robyn with those who left negative comments, and includes this whopper:
My attorney will subpoena Facebook Monday so I can sue her for damages and engage Facebook to find her actual identity and any other fake profiles where she spreads hate speech and terrorism.
And there's more. This time, a message from "Drew Millz."
Well, the c&d is obviously informal, as it said, from a non attorney (who is talking to attorneys as she vets them for who is most qualified to sue the rolls doing damage to her business, harassing, and other cyber crimes).
And when the suits against those doing damage to her business are filed, they will of course all be based on actual law.
Well, phew. Actual law. Like the 1st Amendment? Might want to look that one up before suing over speech.
All of you can discuss at will but if you do damage to Ms Openshaw and her publishers' properties or slander or harass you will face legal consequences.
Some will be served at home and some at work so be mindful if you are the type of person to harm strangers' IP and web properties.
Some of you have done it to many people and we are collecting that evidence to make this a larger order and TRO than just Ms Openshaw.
But no one sending the INFORMAL c&d claimed to be an attorney.
The informal c&d stated these options are being considered.
The legal team about to represent Ms Openshaw in these actions feel there is RICO justification for two of the supertrolls.
RICO justification? Informal C&Ds? This is just so much fun, I might have to go drink an orange smoothie to celebrate. Anyway, the informal cease and desist letters then turned into "draft" C&D letters, because that makes no sense at all. Also, they promise to drag the people they're threatening to Utah to defend this, once again effectively admitting that this is vexatious.
There's also a separate Twitter account that first claimed Openshaw was already sending subpoenas and also looking for a lawyer (i.e., sending subpoenas before having a lawyer?!?):
Robyn Openshaw, public figure THE #1 health site , is seeking a top attorney that specializes in cyber bullying. She has been very public that she is going to sue a number of the trolls & is already subpoenaing their info and says it will ALL be in public court of law record! thx
And when more knowledgeable people pointed out how silly this claimed, the responses got worse:
She didn’t have to get any of the information subpoenaed. Asking the universe will provide. This is going to be an epic case that will set a precedence and she said these trolls are going to pay. With more than money.
Asking the universe will provide.
If her knowledge of health and wellness is at the same level as her knowledge of the law, well, I'd maybe stay away from green smoothies.
The threats on Facebook have continued -- with the latest coming from a brand new profile under the name "Jeff Johnson" claiming that Openshaw doesn't want to harm anyone's right to free speech -- but somehow calling out her bogus threats is an attack on her free speech. Because, of course:
That one also includes some fun insults about "under employed lawyers" and warnings about more lawsuits.
I get that people not fawning over you may feel bad. And that negative reviews may hurt. But hitting back with bogus legal threats, then doubling down with even more threats that are in no way reflective of the actual law, is no way to go through life.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cyberbullying, defamation, free speech, green smoothie girl, reviews, robyn openshaw, slapp, threats
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What goes in tends to come out
Does the paranoia Robyn Openshaw seems to be experiencing come from drinking Green Smoothies? If so, there is no better negative review available.
Then again I have never heard of paranoia coming from consuming anything. Does that mean the paranoia is inherent?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What goes in tends to come out
I mean, I've consumed some foods that made me paranoid, but not since college.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What goes in tends to come out
In my college time I thought the Dutch had a monopoly on that kind of green smoothies. I know times and laws have changed in the US since then. ;-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What goes in tends to come out
Yeah, and I never drank alcohol until I turned 21, either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(emphasis added)
Am I the only thinking that you might want to be careful with this phrasing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Looks like an accurate description of fad diets to me. Especially if you believe you've ingested a toxin and are choosing smoothies over an emergency room.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Break out your shake weights and green popcorn, things are going to get good here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We've turned opinions into crimes the past few years
Daily, we see people getting punished and deplatformed simply for their opinions. So it's not surprising she's this delusional. Our entire society has been made delusional to prepare them to vote the way the corporations want them to vote. She's simply prepared to be told what to do. This is what the Manchurian Voter looks like.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds like someone doesn’t like the idea of social consequences for certain kinds of speech/expression.
Educated guess here, but I’m guessing she didn’t become delusional because other people got whapped by a banhammer for saying racial slurs or cussing out verified Twitter accounts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sounds like someone doesn’t like the idea of social consequences for certain kinds of speech/expression.
Lynching used to be one such social consequence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Because being deplatformed is totally like being dragged through the mud on a horse or a car and then hung on a tree. Nice analogy there, bucko. [/s]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And in the context of that analogy, "deplatformed" is actually the equivalent of being kicked out of the town by the Sheriff.
I really hate that word, deplatformed, it reeks of a poor me, I'm a victim mentality. Why not call it for what it is, telling assholes that they aren't welcome anymore and they can take their dreck somewhere else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
More like being kicked out from a restaurant...
Until you decide to wear a mask and sneak in that is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
How's that Grindr lawsuit coming along, Jhon boi?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Wow jhonboi. What did you do that your so afraid of people finding out bro?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We've turned opinions into crimes the past few years
What does the term "deplatformed" mean?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: We've turned opinions into crimes the past few years
Suppose you're booked to speak at an event of some kind.
A bunch of people opposed to your views demand that either the event is cancelled -- or you are.
Your speaking gig gets pulled. Congratulations, you have been deplatformed. Famous people this has happened to include the feminist writer Germaine Greer (not politically correct enough, particularly where trans people are concerned), right wing commentator Ann Coulter, and "cultural libertarian" Milo Yiannopoulos.
...telling assholes that they aren't welcome anymore and they can take their dreck somewhere else.
The decision to declare people to be [insult] and to tell them they're not welcome any more is usually taken by a group of activists with a bee in their bonnet about ___, e.g. right-wingery. They then proceed to make enough noise that the speaker is dropped and/or the event cancelled.
I'm not a fan because this is political; while militant progressivism rules the roost, right wing mean people will have their speaking engagements cancelled under pressure from the proggies.
If right-wingery becomes more popular, guess which group's darlings will find themselves kicked off campus for having unapproved views? History has a nasty habit of repeating itself because we like to think that the lessons don't apply to us. The do, people. This century's Thirties have come a bit early; hard on the heels of our fin-de-siecle excesses. Expect a right-wing pushback and the imposition of fascist regimes all over the place until our Sixties kick in and we have another Flower Power counter-cultural revolution. I believe the advent of the internet is speeding things up because we're better able to communicate and coordinate than ever before. Will the next round of fin-de-siecle excesses come before the end of this century?
Learn the lessons, people. Learn the lessons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: We've turned opinions into crimes the past few years
*They do, people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not for nothin’, but if “right-wingery” becomes more of a thing, certain members of certain groups won’t be the only members of those groups to leave when the booting comes. You can argue about whether “left-wingery” comes with its own form of authoritarianism attached. But the debate on whether that applies to “right-wingery” has been settled thanks to gerrymandering, anti-abortion laws, anti-LGBT civil rights activists, right wing militias, Christian dominionists, and Donald Trump in general.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[Sad but True]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We've turned opinions into crimes the past few years
Lay off the green smoothies bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We've turned zofs into shits the past few years
“So it's not surprising she's this delusional“
Takes one to know one bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hopefully a new law is named after her
Once all of this is taken care of I suspect a new internet law may be named after Robyn Openshaw based on her insane version of the legal system and reality that she is trying to use against the rest of the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hopefully a new law is named after her
Absolutely. It's called a federal anti-SLAPP statute, and this is a textbook example of why we need one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hopefully a new law is named after her
It totally is. I think she's a nut. If she sees this comment, she'll come after me.
Thanks to TD, I know not to worry and to tell her to bring it on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Devin Nunes, to his lawyers: Damn, even I’m not that awful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Devin Nunes to his lawyers part 2 "Damn, even I’m not that awful...but I want to be."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
She definitely has some issues. She and her family appeared on that show WIFE SWAP a few years back and she runs her home like a Gestapo training camp.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=oa20jA4oQa4
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Mate, if you have issues with her, she must be awful!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't Openshaw's actions constitute cyberbullying? Doesn't that violate Facebook's policies? Maybe FB should delete Openshaw's account.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: O irony!
That would be so damn funny!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Robyn is creating her reputation
Good job Robyn. You will be remembered more for this than your smoothies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You only get one first impression
Given this is the first I've ever heard of her or the smoothies, yeah, after this point 'childish tantrum and laughably bad legal threats' will forever more be linked to both her and the drink in my mind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
they know that Facebook messenger is not really a legal way of legally contacting someone, right? I mean, we are in the digital age and all, and I am all for not using snail mail, but that is kind of taking class to Donald Trump lows.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Maybe it is an acceptable method if contact in the Special High Internet Tribunal...where the Zero Amendment trumps everything.
"No person shall use the Internet to cause any other person any butthurt or to suffer the anguish of the Streisand Effect."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But has she contacted the Internet Police?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Im guessing she's left that to her cyber security specialist since he would have their direct line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Does funding for The Internet Police come from the newly created SpacedOut Force?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It is if the judge approves.
https://www.lawpracticetoday.org/article/service-process-via-social-media/
More to the point, these aren't legal notices, they're just threats. They have no force of law and so can be delivered however she wants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Glorious
As someone that's received numerous messages and a fun doxx from OpenJaw and her loud friends - We all appreciate you. <3
It's alarming when someone throws out threats of criminal activity your way and actual attorneys talking about it has given us all the ability to laugh. There's at least two dozen of us that have received these.
Happy Holiday's y'all
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Glorious
best wishes to you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Her Twitter profile is gone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Is that the start of "The Crumbling Green Smoothie Girl?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That went poof as soon as Ari Cohn started engaging her. Shortly prior she also learned how to use Facebook tools for privacy and locked that down too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm sure it's a total coincidence that she decided to hide/delete an account that was throwing out baseless legal threat and legal claims shortly after an actual lawyer weighed in to point out how utterly empty they were and started cataloging them for all to see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Apparently she came through as promised and at least two of the targeted people, myself included have been banned from FB and our accounts deleted.
I guess I'll go check the mail for my subpoena to Utah.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Because of course FB fell for that garbage...
Are you able to appeal the decision, or did they go nuclear from the outset and made it a permanent ban?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
They required me to upload a Gov ID which I struggled with doing. That's just .. crazy. I've had the account for over a decade.
They did give it back to me after I folded to the Zuckery. So far I'm the only one with a restored account.
But we do have a new threat so that's exciting :/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
afaik, FB is trying to obtain additional personal information, which of course, they do not need.
They freeze your account claiming suspicious activity and recommend you upload copies of government IDs in order to restore the account. Failure to do so results in no access for about two weeks after which they restore the account with no additional info being provided.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I can see that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Looks she has been introduced to the "Streisand effect".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
All because of the "Nunes effect".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does this involve campus speech in any way?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not an orange smoothie
If you're looking to do the opposite of green smoothie, you might want to pop an orange roughy into the blender.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/Orange_roughy.png
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jesus fuck, the church of Robyn is super hilarious.
...Dunning-Kruger, Streisand, RICO
It's the end of the world as we know it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Couldn't help but hearing R.E.M. sing that comment while reading it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I didn't think of that at first... but now I can hear it too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
... think I'll pass
If this is the sort of behavior that someone who came up with a 'green smoothie' engages in, think I'll stay as far away from it as possible, as I can't help but find suspect any advice given by someone this childish/dishonest/deranged, and the fact that at least part of this tantrum was kicked off by someone posting the utterly slanderous assertion of 'these claims are unproven' doesn't exactly help that with that concern.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guess she didn't learn from Roca Labs's example.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would not want to inflict harm on innocent third parties, but it sure is tempting to refer GreenSmoothieGirl to Joseph Rakofsky just to see what happens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I looked him up. What a prat!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Idiots
I and many others consider reviews, tweets and Facebook posts to be opinions. When a company behaves in this way, threatening lawsuits and criminal charges it adds weight to every negative opinion. Now the simple opinion becomes "there must be some truth in there to prompt this kind of response". It is bullying on the part of the company. The negative vibe will now be carried natiionally and even globally instead of staying within a relative few followers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does any of Openshaw's behavior violate Facebook TOS, or constitute a basis for a civil suit? Seems like sending extravagant threats and maliciously reporting critics to FB should be grounds for a permanent FB ban, and maybe extortion charges.
As for the claimed benefits of "green smoothie" I rank it as goop wannabe and something Derek Lowe could demolish in a single paragraph.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good Luck with That
I recall one case here in Fla where the recipient of the threat regarding their reviews decided to bite first. They brought a dec action and also damages.
They won.
I'm not so sure that the action of sending a baseless threat is entirely free of risk. At least where the recipient already has a lawyer, the threats may become not merely the grist of humor, but also the basis of more.
For instance, if the threat says that the threatener will get fees, then the threatenee may have a basis to demand fees in return. That can make the threats painful.
If the threat comes from out of state, there is probably venue in your state because the threat was specifically targeting your state.
For all these reasons, it may be wise to avoid silly threats. I say that, in prelude to saying also of the green smoothie lady appears to
This opinion is based on what I have read in the original article above. If Ms Green Slime needs to find me, the Google works amazingly well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Good Luck with That
"have a parent who smells of elderberries" - I'm dead LOL
We've all lost our Facebook accounts now. Which affects me directly in my ability to do my actual job. So she won after all.
Thanks for the giggle though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]