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…
Filed Under: copyright, harassment
Comments on “Is Falsely Being Accused Of File Sharing With An Automated Pre-Settlement Letter A Form Of Harassment?”
It has worked before
One victim did get a £250 judgement against Davenport – Lyons in the past
What about calling it what it really is: an extortion attempt?
They should be disbarred just for the carpet bombing alone and thrown in jail for the extortion. But don’t hold your breath, it’s not like that is going to happen.
Mike still calls the ACTA meetings “negotiations”. It’s all about not driving away traffic with overly-polarizing word choice.
Re: Re: Extortion?
What would you call it?
I agree, sounds like extortion to me.
Class action the cure for corporate indifference
I’d say it would make a good counter attack.
U.K. law is different so there may be a possibility, also libel laws are in favor of people there.
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”.
Corportasim Running Amok
We seemingly are becoming a society were the common citizen can be “assaulted” with impunity and without due process.
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).
Re: Corportasim Running Amok
Due process is like free speech.
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…
definately slander and defamation of character
thats right pay back time
“as the lawyers bringing the suits would make the case that it was just an “honest mistake.”
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.
Harassment? Oh yeah, in a big way! The correct action is file class action against whoever is sending the BS-ograms!
How do you know you’re not being scammed altogether?
Harrassment in legal threats
Hopefully you will get responses from people who litigate, rather than prosecute IP as I do.
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).