5 ms·
The premise of this article is that you somehow have to respond to it which is nuts. If the letter is ridiculous (e.g. citing terms of service you did not sign
by jdsully 3y ago
The premise of this article is that you somehow have to respond to it which is nuts. If the letter is ridiculous (e.g. citing terms of service you did not sign) then you're better off to ignore it and not waste money on legal fees. Also everyone who suggests getting a lawyer has probably not had to hire one in the past. With very few exceptions they will tell you it "depends" and maybe give you a few legal terms you can google. If you are lucky a good lawyer will give you their opinion on the merits of the letter but many will be so guarded it's not useful.
A C&D costs the sender almost nothing and is not the same as actually being sued. Very rarely are they serious enough to actually file something. If that does happen you should get a lawyer at that point, but doing it before is just a waste of money.
- encomiast 3y agoNot sure we read the same article. The first point under "Decide how to respond" is "1. Ignore" (although it suggests this is risky if ignore includes continuing what lead to the C&D)
- jdsully 3y ago#1 is to "pause immediately". Much further down in the article they get to the ignore option.
- hodgesrm 3y agoIf you have not received a C&D before then the reason to consult with an attorney is to evaluate the risk. A lot of legal trouble arises from assuming you understand something when you actually don't. (Ask me how I know.)
- phendrenad2 3y agoHow do you know?
- hodgesrm 3y agoSigned a legal document in support of an open source initiative against patents that had a section that was confusing and hard to understand. I remember thinking it was probably no big deal and anyway the document was for a good cause. A couple years later that section had legal consequences almost derailed a major transaction involving our company. We could have avoided the whole thing by checking with our lawyer first. Moral of the story: never sign any legal document you don't understand.
- jdsully 3y agoTheres a big difference between not responding and proactively signing something.
- hodgesrm 3y agoNot responding is also an action. Just assuming it's safe to ignore a C&D without understanding possible risks would not be my first choice. For instance it would be helpful to know if you need to seek out additional legal counsel which is potentially time-consuming and expensive.
- baobabKoodaa 3y ago> If you have not received a C&D before then the reason to consult with an attorney is to evaluate the risk. The poster you are responding to just explained that most lawyers are too guarded to offer a useful evaluation of the risk, thus rendering their advice useless or low value.
- hodgesrm 3y agoThat is a bad reason not to consult with a lawyer. Hire a good one who knows the business you are in.
- baobabKoodaa 3y agoAnd how exactly is a normal person going to evaluate which lawyer is a "good one" and which is not?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Aeolun 3y agoIf they say ‘it depends’ they are a bad one? Of course, you’d have to not pay them for pointless advice, or it gets expensive very quickly.
- baobabKoodaa 3y agoOk, so you get a lawyer, ask their advice, realize it's worthless, and then you... don't pay the lawyer's bill? So now you have 2 legal issues, and no lawyer. Sounds like a worse position than what we started off with.
- Aeolun 3y agoThere should be some clause about the advice being worthless. Same as when I buy a product online but nothing is actually delivered?