The suckiest aspect of what they're doing is the target. GW are sending their nastygrams to a novelist. And not a best-seller, but a low-budget self-published

The suckiest aspect of what they're doing is the target. GW are sending their nastygrams to a novelist. And not a best-seller, but a low-budget self-published author who's been donating a chunk of the proceeds to veterans' charities: someone without a sufficiently deep pocket to fund a legal defense. If GW's lawyers really had the power of their convictions they'd have started by targeting James Cameron over "Avatar". After all, which infringement is more damaging to their brand -- an obscure self-pub serial with maybe a couple of thousand readers, or a big budget movie franchise that cost a billion dollars to make and presumably (Hollywood accounting practices aside) made the backers a profit?