6 ms·
BitTorrent Defense Lawyer Joins Copyright Trolls
- andrewfelix 15y agoIt's a profit driven industry like any other. I find it disgusting, but I don't find it surprising.
- spooneybarger 15y agoIt would be great if he turned out to have switched sides because he felt aggrieved and wronged by the people he used to defend, much like Benedict Arnold.
- gojomo 15y agoMaybe he was a double-agent for the copyright cartels all along. Or a triple-agent now.
- atakan_gurkan 15y agoIf you mean he can turn around and sue copyright trolls again, he cannot do that. His former clients will claim there is a conflict, since now he has access to their data under attorney client relationship.
- jiggy2011 15y agoDoesn't this work the other way around? Perhaps not since his previous clients would have been individual cases for disparate individuals and there wouldn't have been so much 'data'?
- gojomo 15y agoReal double- and triple- agents laugh at claims of 'conflict' and the rules which bind ordinary agents.
- cft 15y agoMy girlfriend's father has this saying: "When you have a lawyer, you have TWO problems" i.e. the underlying problem, and the lawyer himself
- fourply 15y agoThis is why we can't have nice things.... and why the EFF [Subpoenadefense] list is basically dead.
- adamdecaf 15y agoYou know what his choice made me do? Donate to the EFF (they apparently even have a sponsor to match donations to $500k). I hope Mike realized how asinine his decision was.
- naner 15y agoIgnoring the moral aspects here, this is a smart strategic move. Who better to bring a case against bittorrent users than one who knows all their defensive moves? From the other side, lawyers defending bittorrent users against Meier can use his old arguments against him. Though I don't know how much that will help.
- AJ007 15y agoMay be this was his plan all along.
- lukejduncan 15y agoFrom a lawyers perspective, this may even be admirable. part of the ethos of the industry is the ability to defend and prosecute both sides of an argument.
- jwb119 15y agohe's got more issues than just morality here, as the DC rules of professional conduct for lawyers apply to him.. in part, he may be barred (or may at least need consent) from any litigation where his new clients interests are adverse to his former clients interests. For instance... " a lawyer shall not represent a client with respect to a matter if: (1) That matter involves a specific party or parties and a position to be taken by that client in that matter is adverse to a position taken or to be taken by another client in the same matter even though that client is unrepresented or represented by a different lawyer; (2) Such representation will be or is likely to be adversely affected by representation of another client;" See: http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/ethics/legal_ethics/rules_of_professional_conduct/amended_rules/rule_one/rule01_07.cfm http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/ethics/legal_ethics/rules_o...
- jwb119 15y agohe's got more issues than just morality here, as the DC rules of professional conduct for lawyers apply to him.. in part, he may be barred (or may at least need consent) from any litigation where his new clients interests are adverse to his former clients interests. For instance... " a lawyer shall not represent a client with respect to a matter if: (1) That matter involves a specific party or parties and a position to be taken by that client in that matter is adverse to a position taken or to be taken by another client in the same matter even though that client is unrepresented or represented by a different lawyer; (2) Such representation will be or is likely to be adversely affected by representation of another client;" See: http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/ethics/legal_ethics/rules_of_professional_conduct/amended_rules/rule_one/rule01_07.cfm http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/ethics/legal_ethics/rules_o...