In striving to become inoffensive to all, Google will evolve into some weird analog of gut bacteria: necessary for the smooth operation of the corpus internetum, but not something you'd want your sister to date.
The letter from Internet Lawyer Amendola to Ms. hunt states that Hunt wrote "can verify that EMP requires..." However, in the blog post, this was actually written by 'David Soloman' in a comment immediately before Hunt's.
One wonders if this is indicative of Amendola's investigative skills in general, or if was she suffering mini-strokes the day she wrote the letter...
Are we doomed to plod the same tread as our forebears? May we raise our sights above the mud and see a better world, and in the dreaming of it make it real? For make no mistake - the machinations of the USTR is a deliberate continuation of the effort to turn copyright into something predatory. Stay a rabbit, if it pleases you...or find your voice, and become larger than you thought.
Perhaps she should set herself up as a "gluten free food" consultant and charge per consultation...
Indeed. And the sign on her store could reflect her willingness to do this, instead of reflecting her frustration. For myself, seeing a sign like that would make me turn around and head for the nearest computer.
...shown by these guys is just appalling. Here they are, running a modestly successful and...not precisely illegal...extortion racket, and Steele uses the name of his caretaker on legal documents? Has he never heard of using a phone book and picking a name at random?
A person can choose to commit a crime, or not. It behooves the intelligent lawbreaker to at least study up on their methods - extortion is not really a learn-as-you-go career choice.
These palookas are going to do the perp walk for this caper.
You're not far off the mark. From the cited WSJ article:
[Kathy Wolfe, who owns a small independent U.S. film-distribution company] estimates that she lost over $3 million in revenue in 2012 as a result of stolen content from her top 15 titles. On top of that, she spends over $30,000 a year—about half her profit—just to send out takedown notices for her titles.
Recall the comment quoted above from the actual shills. Proper spelling & grammar, Complete sentences, logic flowing from sentence to sentence...
...these are not characteristics of the common troll comments. It seems our lot are still thrashing through the basic arguments (moral stance, legal stance) without insight into the central fact of copyright: an artificial limitation, imposed from without, between creator and audience.
...but it is a very close cousin. It seems Prenda Law is indulging in reductio ad absurdum; the penultimate moment will occur when Prenda sues itself for infringing on its' own copyright claim to legal clown piefights.