4 ms·
1. Zillow should have to pay a fine for getting the law so wrong. 2. There needs to be proper legal protections for people against Big Co. doing this. Maybe a
by JustSomeNobody 9y ago
1. Zillow should have to pay a fine for getting the law so wrong.
2. There needs to be proper legal protections for people against Big Co. doing this. Maybe a third party set up to look over the C & D's issued to bloggers. I don't know how this should or would work, but something needs to change.
- atom_enger 9y agoCan Zillow be held liable for lost revenues since Kate felt compelled to shut down the site?
- toufka 9y agoThis is likely why they have the, "please don't" shut down your site" line in the letter. A dodge to shift their original intent away from that kind of liability.
- emodendroket 9y agoWas she making money off of it?
- atom_enger 9y agoShe's claimed the site was her livelihood: https://twitter.com/mcmansionhell/status/879432256363925507 https://twitter.com/mcmansionhell/status/879432256363925507 I would assume and hope that she was. I enjoyed the content and she deserved to be paid for it. But I don't know if she meant livelihood in the financial context or not, so I couldn't tell you definitively.
- jeremy7600 9y agoyes, from patreon and selling merch
- pdelbarba 9y ago2. This is what the EFF currently exists for.
- joelrunyon 9y agoEFF only takes on a limited scope of cases though. Can't protect any & everyone.
- ceejayoz 9y agoA federal-level anti-SLAPP law would be nice, though.
- exelius 9y agoConsidering most of our congresspeople are lawyers, any sort of tort reform in this country is basically a pipe dream.
- enraged_camel 9y agoRegarding 2, the reason the tactic is effective is because it is trivial to write C&D letters, but non-trivial to determine if they have merit. So they are effectively used as a denial of service attack by big corps.