3 ms·

On his website he has "More than 30,000 people have settled their cases for between $3,000 - $12,000. Were you one of them?" Last year I led a Startup Weekend

On his website he has "More than 30,000 people have settled their cases for between $3,000 - $12,000. Were you one of them?" Last year I led a Startup Weekend team for crowd-sourced legal defense, 1) for people mentioned above to pool together a large defense front so more cases like these would end up in court, and 2) for people already there like Joel, who are seriously outgunned financially which hurts society as a whole by allowing bad precedence to be set. The inspiration for #2 came from George Hotz getting a mass of donations in under 2 days when he was sued by Sony for hacking the PS3, enough that he had to stop taking them. I still think it's a great idea, although perhaps not legally tenable. In any case just throwing it out there.

newbusox 14y ago
That sounds like a good idea, although it looks like Joel has representation from a professor at Harvard law (Charles Nesson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Nesson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Nesson) who, I would guess, is representing him for free. There are probably a non-insignificant number of attorneys who are passionate about this sort of stuff that would take on these kinds of cases pro bono, although finding them may difficult.
- brandall10 14y ago
  Nesson is no doubt brilliant but he's done some pretty maverick things: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091207/1149277233.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091207/1149277233.shtml Additionally the other big case in this domain, Capital v. Thomas, has seen much of the same. Some very talented people working the case pro-bono, but seemingly doing this for the spotlight. It's good to have options. It's good to not have these things turn into a circus if it can be helped. But then again, IANAL.
jnbiche 14y ago
Do you have a site up? I wish we could come together as a community and crowd-source the f* out of this issue. Something to take away the fear that RIAA is sowing and give people who downloaded or shared a few songs their lives back. I'm not wealthy, but I'd donate a respectable sum to a legitimate fundraising entity for the defense and support of RIAA targets.
- AUmrysh 14y ago
  I'd only fund it if it goes toward burning down the RIAA offices. Don't give them money and make them think what they are doing is right or just, the RIAA is scum and they screw artists out of profit for their works too. The only acceptable solution is the dissolution of the RIAA/MPAA. It looks like it's already happening as artists harness the power of the internet, but I'm sure we'll have to deal with these dinosaurs of organizations for a few more decades at least.
- brandall10 14y ago
  No, we let it slide after SW... it's funny, coming into that event my friend and I were really fired up about it, after the event we felt a bit deflated; most people didn't seem to get why people would want to put money into something like this, one of the judges even called it 'odd charity' despite me explaining it wasn't really charity at all. Also the attorneys that were there were pretty pessimistic about it and cautioned us about all sorts of legal issues. But it is something I want to see in the world, so happy to throw the idea out if anyone wants to tackle it.
socratease 14y ago
It's not untenable at all. Are you familiar with investment funds that take positions on the likelihood of success in some litigation? In a nutshell, non-parties to the litigation make bets on the outcome of the suit. I believe there is at least one fund like this active in the UK. Guess who started it? A former trial lawyer. This differs from donating to the EFF in that you have a say over what specific cases you want to invest in.

newbusox 14y ago

That sounds like a good idea, although it looks like Joel has representation from a professor at Harvard law (Charles Nesson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Nesson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Nesson) who, I would guess, is representing him for free. There are probably a non-insignificant number of attorneys who are passionate about this sort of stuff that would take on these kinds of cases pro bono, although finding them may difficult.

brandall10 14y ago
Nesson is no doubt brilliant but he's done some pretty maverick things: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091207/1149277233.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091207/1149277233.shtml Additionally the other big case in this domain, Capital v. Thomas, has seen much of the same. Some very talented people working the case pro-bono, but seemingly doing this for the spotlight. It's good to have options. It's good to not have these things turn into a circus if it can be helped. But then again, IANAL.

jnbiche 14y ago

Do you have a site up? I wish we could come together as a community and crowd-source the f* out of this issue. Something to take away the fear that RIAA is sowing and give people who downloaded or shared a few songs their lives back. I'm not wealthy, but I'd donate a respectable sum to a legitimate fundraising entity for the defense and support of RIAA targets.

AUmrysh 14y ago
I'd only fund it if it goes toward burning down the RIAA offices. Don't give them money and make them think what they are doing is right or just, the RIAA is scum and they screw artists out of profit for their works too. The only acceptable solution is the dissolution of the RIAA/MPAA. It looks like it's already happening as artists harness the power of the internet, but I'm sure we'll have to deal with these dinosaurs of organizations for a few more decades at least.
brandall10 14y ago
No, we let it slide after SW... it's funny, coming into that event my friend and I were really fired up about it, after the event we felt a bit deflated; most people didn't seem to get why people would want to put money into something like this, one of the judges even called it 'odd charity' despite me explaining it wasn't really charity at all. Also the attorneys that were there were pretty pessimistic about it and cautioned us about all sorts of legal issues. But it is something I want to see in the world, so happy to throw the idea out if anyone wants to tackle it.

socratease 14y ago

It's not untenable at all. Are you familiar with investment funds that take positions on the likelihood of success in some litigation? In a nutshell, non-parties to the litigation make bets on the outcome of the suit. I believe there is at least one fund like this active in the UK. Guess who started it? A former trial lawyer. This differs from donating to the EFF in that you have a say over what specific cases you want to invest in.