3 ms·

You're absolutely correct when it comes to legal advice, as such would need to avoid such land mines. But that's not the issue here. The issue here is whether

by nirvana 14y ago

You're absolutely correct when it comes to legal advice, as such would need to avoid such land mines. But that's not the issue here. The issue here is whether one can suggest possible legal avenues of investigation that could be used to get a lawyer interested in the case. There is zero risk in reading the law and then talking to a lawyer about what you find there.

cube13 14y ago
>But that's not the issue here. The issue here is whether one can suggest possible legal avenues of investigation that could be used to get a lawyer interested in the case. Here's how you get a lawyer interested in the case: 1. Find the phone number of a lawyer. Contact the EFF, or the local bar association for a lawyer that's listed as knowledgeable with the part of law that you're dealing with(in this case, copyright and trademark law). 2. Call the lawyer, arrange a meeting. Gather up everything they ask for when you call them. 3. Meet with the lawyer. If it doesn't go well, go back to step 1. Repeat until done. 4. There is no step 4. This should be the only piece of advice in this thread.
- ferringham 14y ago
  oh Mr. Very Important and his "this should be the only piece of advice in this thread." A few days ago there was this post #1 on YC News about a guys whose kid had this super-rare genetic disorder. Now, what, this guy should only listen to the Doctors and forget about turning on his own brain? I think that a good lawyer will listen to his Client and appreciate the Client who is interested enough in his case to propose solutions based on this readings/understanding of the Law. Or even discuss the stuff he saw here. Why on Earth everybody such a pain about legal advise and when it comes to much more important thing in life - health, life threatning disease - nobody's complaining when questions are asked and resolutions proposed. HN as I understand it is to exchange and share information. Not to censor it. Go to Cuba with your attitude dude. Or just relax.
  - jsprinkles 14y ago
    That child's doctors personally examined the child, have expertise to deal with the situation, and are aware of any details which are important. A HN commenter has not personally met either party, in most cases is not a lawyer so he does not have expertise to deal with the situation, and most importantly, are only aware of what one party has told them. There is a significant difference.
    - detst 14y ago
      You should take a look at an exchange between that guy and a guy with the bio: "Software development, web design ; interested in movies, animation and humor." [1] Should they both just shut up and let the big boys handle it? Or should he take another person's input and use his head to determine it's value? People are capable of offering valuable input without expertise and full details. As PG said, "Don't trust stuff you read on forums." He didn't say ignore it. It might even save his son's life. I'm strongly inclined to believe this can work in law as it can work with extremely rare medical conditions. [1] http://twitter.com/mattmight/status/207529584999153664 http://twitter.com/mattmight/status/207529584999153664

by nirvana 14y ago

cube13 14y ago

>But that's not the issue here. The issue here is whether one can suggest possible legal avenues of investigation that could be used to get a lawyer interested in the case. Here's how you get a lawyer interested in the case: 1. Find the phone number of a lawyer. Contact the EFF, or the local bar association for a lawyer that's listed as knowledgeable with the part of law that you're dealing with(in this case, copyright and trademark law). 2. Call the lawyer, arrange a meeting. Gather up everything they ask for when you call them. 3. Meet with the lawyer. If it doesn't go well, go back to step 1. Repeat until done. 4. There is no step 4. This should be the only piece of advice in this thread.

ferringham 14y ago
oh Mr. Very Important and his "this should be the only piece of advice in this thread." A few days ago there was this post #1 on YC News about a guys whose kid had this super-rare genetic disorder. Now, what, this guy should only listen to the Doctors and forget about turning on his own brain? I think that a good lawyer will listen to his Client and appreciate the Client who is interested enough in his case to propose solutions based on this readings/understanding of the Law. Or even discuss the stuff he saw here. Why on Earth everybody such a pain about legal advise and when it comes to much more important thing in life - health, life threatning disease - nobody's complaining when questions are asked and resolutions proposed. HN as I understand it is to exchange and share information. Not to censor it. Go to Cuba with your attitude dude. Or just relax.
- jsprinkles 14y ago
  That child's doctors personally examined the child, have expertise to deal with the situation, and are aware of any details which are important. A HN commenter has not personally met either party, in most cases is not a lawyer so he does not have expertise to deal with the situation, and most importantly, are only aware of what one party has told them. There is a significant difference.
  - detst 14y ago
    You should take a look at an exchange between that guy and a guy with the bio: "Software development, web design ; interested in movies, animation and humor." [1] Should they both just shut up and let the big boys handle it? Or should he take another person's input and use his head to determine it's value? People are capable of offering valuable input without expertise and full details. As PG said, "Don't trust stuff you read on forums." He didn't say ignore it. It might even save his son's life. I'm strongly inclined to believe this can work in law as it can work with extremely rare medical conditions. [1] http://twitter.com/mattmight/status/207529584999153664 http://twitter.com/mattmight/status/207529584999153664