by Mike Masnick
Mon, Oct 8th 2007 7:03am
Greg Beck writes "In an apparent attempt to avoid the Streisand Effect, lawyers sending threat letters sometimes claim that the recipient would violate the firm's copyright by posting it online. This post is about Public Citizen's response to one dumb threat letter and its decision to post the letter online despite the copyright claim." It's funny how popular it has become for lawyers to claim it's illegal to post or even show anyone their cease-and-desist letters. Remember: just because a lawyer says so, it doesn't mean it's true. You can see Public Citizen's response to the letter (pdf), which lays out a variety of reasons why the cease and desist is ridiculous (it's yet another attempt to force criticism offline) and ends with a fantastic response to the claim that the original C&D is covered by copyright and cannot be posted online without additional charges: "By this letter, we are inviting you to test the validity of your theory that the writer of a cease and desist letter can avoid public scrutiny by threatening to file a copyright law suit if his letter is disclosed publicly on the internet." Somehow, I doubt the opposing lawyer will test out this theory.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Warner Music's Response To Evidence Of Happy Birthday In The Public Domain: Who Really Knows Anything, Really?
- Study Of Spain's 'Google Tax' On News Shows How Much Damage It Has Done
- Wordpress Takes A Stand Against Abusive DMCA Takedown Notices; Others Should Pay Attention
- Happy Birthday Copyright Bombshell: New Evidence Warner Music Previously Hid Shows Song Is Public Domain
- Even If The State Of Georgia Can Copyright Legal Annotations, Should It?