Court Overreacts And Orders Full Takedown Of Anti-H-1B Websites Over Contradictory Libel/Copyright Claims
from the going-too-far dept
It's no secret that I'm a supporter of allowing more skilled immigrants into the US. The arguments against it make little sense and are usually thinly veiled racism against foreigners. Plenty of studies have shown that skilled immigrants help create new jobs rather than take them away. And barring skilled immigrants from coming into the US just means that they end up working for non-US competitors, rather than helping US companies grow. It's hard to fathom a reason to be against increasing skilled immigration, other than being racist or economically illiterate. Now, that said, it's also no secret that the H-1B process that is one of the main (though not only) routes for skilled technology foreigners to work in the US has some serious flaws and is often abused. But the response should not be to end the H-1B program, but to fix the abuses.All that said, I'm somewhat horrified at the reports (which a whole bunch of you are sending in) about a judge ordering three anti-H-1B websites be taken totally offline. I disagree heavily with those three sites, and think that they are misleading in the extreme, but the order to take them offline goes way overboard. The judge even went further and ordered Facebook to disable the Facebook page of one of the sites.
At issue are libel and copyright charges from a company named Apex, which these sites accuse of abusing the H-1B process. Given that I'm very much against the abuses, I'm all for exposing those who abuse the process. Now here's where things get weird. The main issue is that these sites posted a copy of what's supposedly an employment agreement from Apex, and the discussion "alleges that employees will find it difficult to leave Apex because of its contract terms." Apex claims that this is defamatory, and notes that it had three "consultants" refuse to report for employment because of it. Yet... it also claims that it holds the copyright on the documents. In other words, it admits that the documents are real and legitimate. Otherwise it wouldn't hold the copyright. Thus, it's hard to see how the two charges can stand together. Either the documents are false and defamatory, or there's (potential) copyright infringement and the documents are accurate in portraying Apex's contract terms. So which is it?
Unfortunately we don't know, because the judge has shut down everything.
What's not at all clear is why the judge would completely shut down all three websites and the Facebook page. If there are problems with just this document, order an injunction against that document. Completely shutting down all three websites goes way too far, and seems to go well beyond what either defamation law or copyright law should allow.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, defamation, free speech, immigration h-1b, libel, takedowns, websites
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Questions
Does the first admendment apply in New Jersey?
Is the judge trying to pinch the tubes?
Do judges run for office in New Jersey?
If so, are they required disclose their contributors?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Website(s) in question reloacting outside US in...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
H-1B not needed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: H-1B not needed
That's simply not true. Most of the studies I've seen on the subject have been academic studies, not backed by corporate interests.
Having Americans in those jobs would have done the same thing.
If there were enough skilled American workers to fill those jobs, then perhaps. If there aren't, then you have an issue. Or, if there are workers from elsewhere who can help power a breakthrough, wouldn't you prefer it be for an American company here rather than a foreign company abroad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: H-1B not needed
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/h1bwritings.html
Personally, I'm against H-1B's being used by any consulting/outsourcing company. (Companies like this: http://www.inc.com/magazine/20070901/how-i-did-it-prathiba-ramadoss.html )
The skilled workers could be here in the U.S., but companies have lost interest in training/retaining employees. I saw this drop off in the 90s, when it was outsource the new skills and keep the current employees on maintenance of legacy systems. Once that happens, they're just a layoff away from being unemployable, especially if over 40.
H-1Bs are not the only problem though. I've seen abuse of the 90-day visa with a constant rotation of employees from India to fill project positions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: H-1B not needed
Or if the imported workers are willing to work cheaper than the natives, then you (or at least the indigenous workers) have an issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: H-1B not needed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: H-1B not needed
God not the old line of "not enough of the local workforce skilled enough to do the job", surely you can do better than?
The real truth is "not enough of the local workforce skilled enough to do the job on the cheap"
Take for example the case in the UK with ICT's (Intra Company Transfers) which is the main method companies use to bring in staff these days due to outsourcing offshore falling out of favour.
In 2008, some 30,000 IT people were brought into the UK under the ICT route, 44% of them by just 7 Indian based outsourcing companies and coincidentally the IT sector contains not a single occupation on the skills shortage list.
We quite litterly had thousands of people working their notice periods training their cheaper imported Indian replacements to do the exact same job they had been doing.
And it's not the case with these Indians that they would raise their prices to the normal local levels over time due to cost of living either, because if they leave their job's, guess what? they have to leave the country (Nor is it a case that they bring in much tax revenue as they get the bulk of their pay back in India with just subsistence salary paid in the UK)
This all sounding familiar?
Sure, H1B and ICT's, on paper and if not abused, are great things that can benefit the destination country as much if not more so than the imported workforce, but the problem is the companies not abusing them are a distinct minority not majority. The majority are just using them to give them access to a cheap "indentured" workforce close by
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: H-1B not needed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: H-1B not needed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: H-1B not needed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: H-1B not needed
Big business buys academics all the time. The academic then promotes their sponsor's agenda. What makes you think that the H-1B issue is any different?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. site:endh1b.com apex contract
2. "apex technology group" "employment agreement"
With (1), hit 'cached' to show what Google remembers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Judge
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There will be on the horizon
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There will be on the horizon
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We Have The Skilled
They did the software infrastructure for the payment system that is in use by DFAS when they moved from Cleveland OH.
They were much less costly than talent acquired from inside the USA.
Did they take away jobs from citizens of the USA, you decide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry Mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sorry Mike
That's an abuse of the system. The H1B *requires* recipients to be paid the equivalent wage of a US citizen holding the same job. Again, get rid of the abuses, not the program.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry Mike
The system is way to easy to abuse, it is way too easy to take advantage of foreign workers, and it is way too easy for companies to manipulate the system so they can hire less expensive outside workers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry Mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry Mike
H1B and Patents are both government constructs, systems created by the government to improve X or to encourage Y, whatever those goals may be.
H1B seems to be a program that is abused often enough, either by the employers trying to get cheaper labor, or by the employees trying to get a long enough time in the US perhaps to apply for citizenship or whatever.
Even members of the house and senate have reported abuse levels upwards to 20%.
So this is a program you want to save, get rid of the abuses, not the program.
Patents? The abuse levels are small (and much of the abuse you claim is just patent holders trying to enforce their rights), yet you pretty much damn the concept and wish that it was gone.
Perhaps if the abuse is patents went up to 20%, you would want to save it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry Mike
In theory, maybe. In reality, not so much.
Again, get rid of the abuses, not the program.
Get rid of the program until a system that actually prevents the abuses is implemented.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry Mike
While I think this is good policy, unfortunately, this is not how economics works. Entering more people into the labor market will drive wages down both for US citizens and for H1B recipients.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sorry Mike
Again, get rid of the abuses, not the program.
"""
Mmmm, Mike, I just can't agree with you on this one. I can think of no practical way to curtail those kinds of abuses. I'm not saying get rid of the programs necessarily, but if you accept/believe we need them, then you also accept the abuses that go along with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Enough Jobs for Americans
This company and this judge have some explaining to do, as does a complicit media that has buried the truth about this anti-American worker practice for far too long.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is simply a race to the bottom for the western worker and all workers will lose. Of course that is what the "free trade" proponents want anyway - so at least they are happy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But in the west (mainly English speaking west) the scale has gone too far the other way. Not only has it been made ridiculously easy to import staff on the cheap but they have made just as easy and more importantly cost effect to export the rest of the job's
Like to use your worst case scenario "just means the whole freaking company moves abroad", if the company has moved all its low paying/manual labour job's abroad, is mainly onshoring cheaper foreign labour for the higher level stuff and is probably arranging it tax affairs in such a way that it is paying virtually no tax's in its "home country" in the west...what exactly is the point in trying to keep the company from moving abroad? They are not benefiting the economy or the locals in any meaningful way.
Countries in the west not only need to start seriously tightening up their immigration rule's but also need to start raising their import tax's and closing tax loopholes so that it no longer is so damn cost effective for companies to do what they are doing, because while the current situation might lead to cheaper goods in the short term, in the long run no one is going to be able to afford those goods in the west because all the locals will be out of work or be on the local equivalent of minimum wage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
> and seems to go well beyond what either defamation law or
> copyright law should allow.
Libel and copyright law? I think you're missing the forest for the trees here.
It goes well beyond what the 1st Amendment would allow, which trumps both libel *and* copyright law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not unless the judge changes his mind or is overridden by a higher ranking judge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bill of Rights
> > would allow, which trumps both libel *and*
> > copyright law.
> Not unless the judge changes his mind or is
> overridden by a higher ranking judge.
Whether the ruling is ultimately changed or overturned is irrelevant to whether the ruling itself violates the Constitution. As it stands right now, the judge's order is a violation of the 1st Amendment and the 200+ years of constitutional jurisprudence illumunating it.
If a judge ruled tomorrow that defendants in his court are no longer entitled to lawyers and the cops no longer need warrants to enter and search private homes, that would be in direct violation of the Constituion as. The judge doesn't need to change his mind or be overruled in order for the violation of the Constitution to exist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Bill of Rights
Not until a judge with the authority to do so says so. And that isn't you, now is it?
If a judge ruled tomorrow that defendants in his court are no longer entitled to lawyers and the cops no longer need warrants to enter and search private homes, that would be in direct violation of the Constituion as.
So, you're saying even the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to interpret the constitution? I guess it's all up to you then, huh? Interesting, but I think you're full of yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bill of Rights
Because an infallible judge can never misinterpret the law just because their decisions are binding.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bill of Rights
> isn't you, now is it?
Judges aren't magical beings. If the Constitution says the government can't do X and some judge says "the government can do X", then those statements are mutually exclusive and the judge's ruling is in violation of what the Constitution requires.
> So, you're saying even the Supreme Court doesn't have the
> authority to interpret the constitution?
I'm not sure how you got from what I wrote to your stated conclusion. The Supreme Court can interpret anything it likes. That doesn't mean it's infallible, however.
Once upon a time the Supreme Court ruled that slavery was constitutional. They were wrong then and they can easily be wrong again in the future.
[Interestingly enough, the power to the Supreme Court claims for itself to void an act of Congress as unconstitutional is found nowhere in the actual Constitution. The Court was never given the power to do that by the Founders. It just assumed that power onto itself in the Marbury case.]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
in all reality, i see a huge negative impact on the economy and further erosion of the middle class as only a few move on to higher paying jobs and currently most people i know move on to lower paying jobs often in other industries as that was all they could get.
tell me again how this program helps anyone other than shoring up the hiring companies bottom line? it has certainly never created a single job for me or anyone that i know.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overbroad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Surplus of US citizen STEM workers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More than just
"Patrick Papalia, an attorney representing Apex, said that the company has already identified an employee who left the initial comment. But he said the issue goes well beyond the agreement and involves threatening and racist comments against company officials, as well as ongoing allegations that it is engaging in illegal activities"
I've occasionally glanced through those websites, and am not surprised by the allegations made by the lawyer, i think the websites were shut for other reasons as well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
H-1B
It's wrong of you to dismiss most critics of H-1B as racist. I've been involved in this for over 15 years, and while there are fringe characters in any movement who are often very vocal, they are the exceptions. The vast majority of people critical of H-1B have no racist motive, and many are themselves non-Anglo and/or nonnative.
The studies showing how many jobs there are in immigrant-founded firms tell us nothing of relevance in this debate. The relevant question is whether immigration has produced a NET increase in tech jobs, and no study has shown this. The rate of tech entrepreneurship per capita for immigrants have been similar to that of natives, so we have no more jobs than if the natives had been in the industry instead of immigrants.
Similarly, the rate of patenting among immigrants, adjusting for education etc., is LOWER than those of natives. Any culture has its comparative advantage, and ours is creativity, a point made by all major Asian governments. Immigration has caused a net decrease in patenting compared to what we would have if the natives had been in the industry instead of immigrants.
Which brings me to the displacement issue. I've been consistently on record as strongly supporting the immigration of "the best and the brightest," but as I've shown in my research, only a small percentage of H-1Bs are in that league. On the contrary, immigration has caused us to lose our own best and brightest, an internal brain drain. This occurs both directly by displacement and indirectly by holding salaries down, so that bright young people find law degrees and MBAs to be far more lucrative than software development. Your statement that there is no down side to tech immigration is way off the mark.
Finally, while you concede that there are abuses of H-1B, you seem to think that these are rare, and fixable by better enforcement of the law. Actually, H-1B is used for cheap labor across the board, including by the big mainstream firms, and is usually done in full compliance with the law, which is riddled with loopholes.
My H-1B Web page (not the one cited in one comment) is
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/h1b.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: H-1B
I think I know why Mike likes H1B so much... less patents!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: H-1B
More patents has been shown to not be an indicator of innovation or economic growth.
I think the H-1B program is working itself out very quickly. Although early on it seemed to bring a lot of - less qualified - employees here, companies seem to be figuring that out. The unqualified people are being discovered rather quickly these days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Contracts are not works of art
Otherwise someone could come up with a new clause and re-write each sentence as many ways as possible and make it impossible for their competitors to implement the TERMS of the clause in any of their contracts.
Further, it's perfectly reasonable to copy a contract wholesale as fair use if the purpose is for discussion and criticism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OUTRAGEOUS!
why is this corporation and the judge they bought
allowed to shut down POLITICAL SPEECH?
This is absolutely stunning and needs more exposure
online and in the media!!!!!
Thank you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
H-1B guestworker not= immigrant
Bernie Sanders says around 6 - 8 pct of H-1b visas are used in the way that the visa was intended - to provide companies with labor and skills it cannot find in america. the rest is abuse. The limits s/b DECREASED , not increased.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]