 gatorkramNeed for SpeedPremium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:2 | How is this even legal? I don't understand how this is even legal.
Company X hires company Y to "investigate" copyright infringement..
I could swear that was the job of some government agencies...
And then....
They send you a letter, saying you broken the law, and violated their copyright, and offer to settle...
Again, how is this legal?
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by gatorkram:I don't understand how this is even legal. Company X hires company Y to "investigate" copyright infringement.. I could swear that was the job of some government agencies... And then.... They send you a letter, saying you broken the law, and violated their copyright, and offer to settle... Again, how is this legal? It is a CIVIL procedure and not a criminal one. So, it isn't the job of the government.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? |
|
 RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | said by Linklist:It is a CIVIL procedure and not a criminal one. IMO: It IS a Criminal (as in Protection Racket) Proceeding. IOW: Pay us our protection fee or we will sue you. |
|
gatorkramNeed for SpeedPremium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:2 | reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:said by gatorkram:I don't understand how this is even legal. Company X hires company Y to "investigate" copyright infringement.. I could swear that was the job of some government agencies... And then.... They send you a letter, saying you broken the law, and violated their copyright, and offer to settle... Again, how is this legal? It is a CIVIL procedure and not a criminal one. So, it isn't the job of the government. Really? I could swear you go in front of a Judge....
So just anyone can walk around, and do investigates, and get judgments now in civil proceedings? Wow....
I don't think that's how it works at all..
This is pretty much back alley blackmailing...
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by gatorkram:said by Linklist:It is a CIVIL procedure and not a criminal one. So, it isn't the job of the government. Really? I could swear you go in front of a Judge.... So just anyone can walk around, and do investigates, and get judgments now in civil proceedings? Wow.... Civil proceedings still have judges. And yes, just about anybody can sue anybody in civil court if you can claim you were damaged in some way. Few cases are ever prevented from being filed.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? |
|
 japPremium
join:2003-08-10
038xx | If it's deemed a pay or else scheme then it's criminal. Courts may well rule as a scare racket due to scope and the appearance of, if not demonstrable fact, a law firm's business model rather than the impetus of the "harmed". |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by jap:If it's deemed a pay or else scheme then it's criminal. Courts may well rule as a scare racket due to scope and the appearance of, if not demonstrable fact, a law firm's business model rather than the impetus of the "harmed". Don't hold your breath on a court ruling against lawyers suing people and deciding that is a criminal enterprise. Sometimes people forget that judges are also lawyers and rarely rule against lawyers suing. That would stop the gravy train. Judges are part of the whole lawsuit racket.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? |
|
japPremium
join:2003-08-10
038xx | As you already know, a judge cannot from the bench of a civil case pass a criminal verdict. They do, however, rule & pass opinion that greatly biases later cases, be they counter suits, criminal investigations, or legislative review.
said by Linklist:Sometimes people forget that judges are also lawyers and rarely rule against lawyers suing. Sometimes you willfully posit logical fallacies in suggestive terms for some ideological (or profit) end. Judges rule against filing lawyers all the time. |
|
|
|
Stumbles
join:2002-12-17
Port Saint Lucie, FL | reply to gatorkram
Actually I think it is the responsibility of the copyright holder and not a government agency to ensure their material is being used as they want. |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to jap
said by jap:As you already know, a judge cannot from the bench of a civil case pass a criminal verdict. They do, however, rule & pass opinion that greatly biases later cases, be they counter suits, criminal investigations, or legislative review. said by Linklist:Sometimes people forget that judges are also lawyers and rarely rule against lawyers suing. Sometimes you willfully posit logical fallacies in suggestive terms for some ideological (or profit) end. Judges rule against filing lawyers all the time. And sometimes you don't know what you are talking about.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? |
|
 cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | reply to RARPSL
said by RARPSL:IMO: It IS a Criminal (as in Protection Racket) Proceeding. IOW: Pay us our protection fee or we will sue you. Almost all civil proceedings have some type of a settlement process before it goes to trial. Neither side usually wants to go to trial and risk losing.
A protection racket is when you have done nothing wrong and someone tells you to pay up "or else". In this case, the law firm has suspicion that copyright infringement was committed. I would imagine that in many cases, the accusations are true. Maybe not all, but many. |
|
