Is Falsely Being Accused Of File Sharing With An Automated Pre-Settlement Letter A Form Of Harassment?
from the we-may-find-out dept
With law operations like ACS:Law in the UK and US Copyright Group in the US sending out thousands upon thousands of "pre-settlement" (i.e., "pay us or we'll sue you") letters for those it accuses of copyright infringement, based on extremely flimsy evidence, it's inevitable that plenty of innocent people will get swept up in the legal threats. At least one law firm in the UK is looking for those who were falsely accused to file a harassment charge on their behalf. This seems like a stretch. Even if it does seem like harassment, my guess is that no court would likely find that such legal threats were harassment, as the lawyers bringing the suits would make the case that it was just an "honest mistake." Of course, if you tried to use that in response to a threat letter for sharing a file online, I doubt these law firms would simply let you walk away...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, harassment
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
It has worked before
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Extortion?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Class action the cure for corporate indifference
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Extortion?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Extortion?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Extortion?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Those law firms have no respect for the rule of law and are using the justice system to make a buck not to redress grievances, they want to turn the courts into "justice incorporated".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Corportasim Running Amok
Content can be taken down without notice based on questionable justification.
Devices can be bricked if a company does not like the way you use the device.
Privacy is the sole responsibility of the unfortunate recipient never the sender (offender).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
definately slander and defamation of character
[ link to this | view in thread ]
But wait...
Could a spammer use that defense? Why not?
What's the difference? It's pretty much a 'spam' tactic they use with these lawsuits.
Either way - if this happens, they may really get drug into court, which is the last thing they want in any of this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Harassment
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Extortion?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Corportasim Running Amok
Money = free speech. More money = more free speech.
Money = due process. More money = more due process.
It's not the fault of the law firm that you don't have enough money to pay for your right to due process...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/09/scammers-using-fake-copyright-infring ement-notices-for-profit.ars
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Harrassment in legal threats
However, when I was a civil attorney, years ago, there was a clear and important distinction between a few people ("I was mistaken") and a large number of people ("I may be mistaken, but I don't care"), especially if you can show the errors were pointed out to the firm, but the firm continued.
One example is simple error, the other is intent or "reckless disregard" for the truth (which is legal intent).
[ link to this | view in thread ]