North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
RE: Compromised machines liable for damage?
- From: Barry Shein
- Date: Mon Dec 26 15:04:34 2005
On December 25, 2005 at 23:14 email@example.com (Hannigan, Martin) wrote:
> Dave, RIAA wins almost 100pct vs p2p'ers ir sues. Its an interesting dichotomy.
Mostly because it's almost always cheaper to settle than pursue a
defense. Read the articles about this "internet illiterate download
mom vs RIAA" story (you can't have missed it.)
She could've settled for ~$3500, she decided to fight it, she's now at
$24,000 in legal expenses and hasn't even gotten close to trial.
No juries to convince, no expert witnesses, no courtroom, no
fascinating point of law debated, just a simple economic choice, wanna
plead guilty for $3500 or run up $25K in legal bills and more? And
probably settle anyhow when you decide you've had enough.
Anyone who speaks about juries, the law, judges, etc in these kinds of
cases is just revealing themselves as having never had any experience
with the US legal system, or is speaking for a wealthy corporation who
can toss $50K at cases on a whim.
In my experience you can easily run up $25K in initial filings, just
letters going back and forth between both sides' lawyers, no judge or
court involved other than it's being filed by a clerk who checks some
mechanics (e.g., deadlines), but no one at the court is reading any of
it and they sincerely hope they never have to (i.e., that you'll
settle out of court, probably because one side ran out of money.)
The World | bzs@TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Login: Nationwide
Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*