3 ms·
Because there is no pay-out. You'd be fighting an uphill battle just to see someone get a slap on the wrist. In the legal profession you have to do someone ext
by pyre 12y ago
Because there is no pay-out. You'd be fighting an uphill battle just to see someone get a slap on the wrist.
In the legal profession you have to do someone extremely egregious to see any action taken against you. Just look at examples like Jack Thomas, or Prenda Law. It took extreme actions for Bar Associations and Courts to even consider the idea that a lawyer might not be acting in good faith.
- wpietri 12y agoAre you sure? I thought OPG v Diebold ended in a substantial payout after false DMCA filings: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPG_v._Diebold http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPG_v._Diebold
- pyre 12y ago1. When you're talking at the company-level, $125k seems like a slap on the wrist. For example, do you think that Qualcomm would really change their practices to avoid a $125k fine rather than just accepting it as the cost of doing business? 2. Diebold probably spent significantly more than $125k just in defending the lawsuit, so the end result of forcing them to pay out $125k is more of a moral victory than anything else. 3. The Diebold case had the benefit of the content itself (internal emails discussing issues with voting machines) being unquestionably in the public interest.
- enraged_camel 12y ago>>Because there is no pay-out. You'd be fighting an uphill battle just to see someone get a slap on the wrist. No, it's much more important than that. If you win, it would establish legal precedent, which would make companies think twice before pulling this type of shenanigans in the future.