Goldman Sachs hires law firm to shut blogger's site

All I have to say about this issue is that Mr. Morgan is protected constitutionally under freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The article that follows does say that: According to Chadbourne & Parke's letter, dated April 8, the bank is rattled because the site "violates several of Goldman Sachs' intellectual property rights" and also "implies a relationship" with the bank itself. I don't know whether this means that Mr. Morgan has a relationship to the bank in terms of current employment or previous employment history, or if Morgan is relying on someone from the inside to give him his information? There are contractual restrictions that keep people from criticizing a corporation they work for. Wouldn't this be the only way Goldman Sachs could legally go after Morgan? But I don't see anything wrong with playing Private Eye on a corporation for purposes of maintaining public record transparency to the taxpayer.

The "violation of intellectual property rights" claim could be a subterfuge the bank firm is using in an effort to silence one of its clearly most vocal critics. These are just my preliminary thoughts.

You can check out the blog here. I will be adding it to the Sites We Like section so that if anything further develops, Mr. Morgan will be sure to tell his readership about it.

In this era of incestuous business-government relationship ties, Mr. Morgan is a hero to be praised. The news story follows

Goldman Sachs hires law firm to shut blogger's site

The bank has instructed Wall Street law firm Chadbourne & Parke to pursue blogger Mike Morgan, warning him in a recent cease-and-desist letter that he may face legal action if he does not close down his website.

Florida-based Mr Morgan began a blog entitled "Facts about Goldman Sachs" – the web address for which is goldmansachs666.com – just a few weeks ago.

In that time Mr Morgan, a registered investment adviser, has added a number of posts to the site, including one entitled "Does Goldman Sachs run the world?". However, many of the posts relate to other Wall Street firms and issues.

According to Chadbourne & Parke's letter, dated April 8, the bank is rattled because the site "violates several of Goldman Sachs' intellectual property rights" and also "implies a relationship" with the bank itself.

Unsurprisingly for a man who has conjoined the bank's name with the Number of the Beast – although he jokingly points out that 666 was also the S&P500's bear-market bottom – Mr Morgan is unlikely to go down without a fight.

He claims he has followed all legal requirements to own and operate the website – and that the header of the site clearly states that the content has not been approved by the bank.

On a special section of his blog entitled "Goldman Sachs vs Mike Morgan" he predicts that the fight will probably end up in court.

"It's just another example of how a bully like Goldman Sachs tries to throw their weight around," he writes.

Speaking to The Daily Telegraph, Mr Morgan explained how he went through a similar battle with US homebuilder Lennar a few years ago after he set up a website to collect information on what he alleged was shoddy workmanship in its homes. The pair eventually settled out of court.

"Since I went through this with Lennar, I've had advice from some of the best intellectual property lawyers, and I know exactly what I can and can't do. We're not going to back down from this," he promises.

Mr Morgan adds that if Goldman manages to shut down his site, he has a number of other domain names registered.

• Speculation is mounting that Goldman Sachs is set to raise several billion dollars via a share sale, possibly next week, in order to pay down a $10bn (£6.8bn) US government loan, as revealed in The Sunday Telegraph last week.