imageedit_2_8364216398

imageedit_2_8364216398

imageedit_2_8364216398

 

Remember last September when everyone on social media was talking about (and laughing at) the idea that FireClean lubricant is Crisco after Andrew Tuohy put up a blog on Vuurwapen titled “Infrared Spectroscopy of Fireclean and Crisco Oils”?

When that blog went viral, Tuohy rode the wave into another round of articles. It even sparked Everett Baker to jump on board, publishing an article backing Tuohy’s research.

When faced with criticism, Tuohy doubled down, claiming FireClean’s demonstration video by tactical trainer Larry Vickers was rigged, which incidentally was originally titled “Where There’s Smoke, There’s Liar”.

Well these assertions have opened up a different venue for Tuohy and Baker to defend their research: a courtroom.

FireClean has filed the first in a series of federal lawsuits against Andrew Tuohy and Everett Baker. According to the suit, filed with the Federal Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, FireClean claims losses of $25,000 per month in sales since the blogger’s articles were published.

They allege multiple counts of defamation against Tuohy and one count of defamation against Baker and charges both with violating the Virginia Business Conspiracy Act and Common Law Conspiracy. FireClean is also demanding a jury trial, compensatory damages, presumed damages for defamation, punitive damages in addition to court costs and attorney’s fees.

From Vuurwapen Blog:

Recently I discovered that myself and Everett Baker were being sued by FireClean for publishing the results of scientific testing of their product along with, among other things, canola oil. You may read their entire complaint here.

I have set up a GoFundMe page for a legal defense fund here.

A major thrust of their suit is that I claimed or implied their product was Crisco. If you will recall from the first article, I clearly stated “I did not – and still do not – believe that FireClean is Crisco…”

When TFB posted an article titled in part “FireClean is Crisco,” I urged the author to change his title and commented publicly on the article that, again, I did not think FireClean was Crisco.

There are obviously issues with their other claims in the complaint, but that is one I felt needed to be addressed immediately.

Furthermore, the series of articles published here contained tests from three different laboratories, and I published every bit of available data and every relevant quote from those who reviewed the data. FireClean’s legal complaint contains a redacted (missing the full spectra) NMR test from a single laboratory.

The 209 page lawsuit is one to be followed, as it attempts to hold firearms bloggers responsible for their content. If the court rules in favor of this lawsuit, it could set a dangerous precedent against the First Amendment, with far-reaching ramifications for a bevy of bloggers as well as general social media content as well.