4 ms·
I think you have way too much faith that a legal proceeding will reveal the "truth" about your intentions and actions. It's about competing narratives and int
by gricardo99 5y ago
I think you have way too much faith that a legal proceeding will reveal the "truth" about your intentions and actions. It's about competing narratives and interpretations of "facts".
If it goes to a legal proceeding, it is about convincing a stranger and lay-person (i.e. Judge, or perhaps even worse a group of jurors), that you didn't violate the law. You have to do this while the other side is doing their very best to convince the same stranger that you are a devious thief who did irreparable harm to their company and cost them millions in damages (or some other absurdly large number). They will paint everything you did and say as part of your plan to steal from and damage their company. They will have highly qualified experts submit very convincing reports, and testify, that what you did was trade secrete theft, and caused immense damage. Your only defense will be to push your own narrative that can counter all of this, sufficiently to get you off the hook. You'll need at least a lawyer, perhaps experts of your own, and all the cost that this entails. This will be a big deal to your life, but will be a business expense (i.e. before taxes) for the company suing you.
- bluGill 5y agoOf course you get a lawyer before it goes to court. However you can do the first round without a lawyer. Just a simple letter saying you dispute a claim is enough in some cases to tell the others you are serious. If you get a response after that, then find a lawyer.
- munk-a 5y agoYou could probably get a response letter drawn up probono by the EFF for the initial claim - but honestly that response letter would likely cost you less than 100$ to have drawn up by a lawyer which is likely a more valuable way for you to spend your time to make sure everything is perfect.
- devoutsalsa 5y agoOr simply ignore them until they actually sue you.
- gricardo99 5y agoI'd say ignore is better than DIY your response.
- munk-a 5y agoPossibly? But I'd primarily say IANAL and you're best off spending the fifty bucks to get a half hour of some lawyer's time on the phone. A while ago I needed to briefly retain a lawyer to navigate a complex contract with my employer, there may be terrible lawyers out there but the person I reached out to was exceedingly thorough in explaining things (and I, as a dev, had lots of rules-lawyery questions to throw at them), quite prompt in their response and charged a modest fee. Speaking to a lawyer will absolutely cost you more than a coffee, but it's not that pricey in the scheme of things compared to getting in legal hot water.
- gricardo99 5y agototally agree. I was picking the least bad option between: a) ignore, b) DIY response. Of course, my opinion, and IMNAL :)
- denton-scratch 5y agoReply: "Thank you for your letter. I am awaiting your writ." Say nothing else. Without a writ, you have little idea what the substance of their legal claim is; there's no purpose in hiring an attorney, because there's nothing for him to work on. So you are saying: "I don't fold to hollow threats and bullying. If you have a proper legal claim, make a proper legal claim." If you then get a writ, show it to a lawyer. If you have no substantial assets, it might be worth pointing that out (once the writ arrives). Nobody wants to sue a man of straw.
- bluGill 5y agoIgnoring is in general the worst thing you can do, if they do anything more it looks bad on you in court. I do agree with those who say get a lawyer to send your response. However you should still do the research yourself - to the best of your ability. You can save yourself some expensive lawyer time by knowing the basics and having a potential draft (be careful: make it clear that you do not have any emotional ties to it so the lawyer is free to tear it up) of your response.