3 ms·

How is this not extortion? Every time I read /r/legaladvice and someone says "Hey I have proof someone stole X should I tell them pay me back or return it or I

How is this not extortion? Every time I read /r/legaladvice and someone says "Hey I have proof someone stole X should I tell them pay me back or return it or I go to the police" and are shouted down that no, threatening to bring in the police is extortion. Weird how when a large company wants compensation it's not...

twblalock 8y ago
Threatening to file a civil suit is not extortion. If it were, it would be pretty much impossible to ever send a cease-and-desist letter.
- wavefunction 8y ago
  It can be extortion, if it's a SLAPP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_publ...
  - tinus_hn 8y ago
    Note that the page you linked does not mention extortion. Anti-SLAPP provisions protect people from SLAPP by making these suits short, dangerous to the party filing the suit or favorable to the defending party.
  - twblalock 8y ago
    If SLAPP lawsuits were extortion, they would have already been illegal and anti-SLAPP legislation would not have been necessary. Such legislation is about preventing companies from using lawsuits to suppress free speech.
- acdha 8y ago
  It’s not always but when there’s a huge difference in money and power it starts to look dubious. If I sue you for $1000, you may settle because that’s cheaper than getting a lawyer even if you’re innocent; at $100k, you’ll lawyer up and win. If a company is totally inappropriately automatically assumed to be more responsible than a person and given legal advantages, that’s even worse because the cost for the defendant is actually even higher! You’ll note that this kind of unbalanced system is specifically mentioned early in the article: > In many states, retailers do not have to return the money they collect if the cases are ultimately dismissed or the people are cleared. A Walmart executive, in a court deposition, acknowledged that the company did not follow up to check on whether people it sought money from had been convicted of shoplifting. If Walmart has to pay costs every time they lost they’d be a LOT more discriminating about when to charge people.
- foobarchu 8y ago
  I agree if cash isn't involved (like with a cease and desist), but threatening civil suit with the caveat that "we won't if you pay X dollars" sounds like textbook extortion.
brigade 8y ago
It might surprise you that /r/legaladvice's legal advice is worth all of the money you paid for it.

twblalock 8y ago

Threatening to file a civil suit is not extortion. If it were, it would be pretty much impossible to ever send a cease-and-desist letter.

wavefunction 8y ago
It can be extortion, if it's a SLAPP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_publ...
- tinus_hn 8y ago
  Note that the page you linked does not mention extortion. Anti-SLAPP provisions protect people from SLAPP by making these suits short, dangerous to the party filing the suit or favorable to the defending party.
- twblalock 8y ago
  If SLAPP lawsuits were extortion, they would have already been illegal and anti-SLAPP legislation would not have been necessary. Such legislation is about preventing companies from using lawsuits to suppress free speech.
acdha 8y ago
It’s not always but when there’s a huge difference in money and power it starts to look dubious. If I sue you for $1000, you may settle because that’s cheaper than getting a lawyer even if you’re innocent; at $100k, you’ll lawyer up and win. If a company is totally inappropriately automatically assumed to be more responsible than a person and given legal advantages, that’s even worse because the cost for the defendant is actually even higher! You’ll note that this kind of unbalanced system is specifically mentioned early in the article: > In many states, retailers do not have to return the money they collect if the cases are ultimately dismissed or the people are cleared. A Walmart executive, in a court deposition, acknowledged that the company did not follow up to check on whether people it sought money from had been convicted of shoplifting. If Walmart has to pay costs every time they lost they’d be a LOT more discriminating about when to charge people.
foobarchu 8y ago
I agree if cash isn't involved (like with a cease and desist), but threatening civil suit with the caveat that "we won't if you pay X dollars" sounds like textbook extortion.

brigade 8y ago

It might surprise you that /r/legaladvice's legal advice is worth all of the money you paid for it.