What better way to start a police state and train the masses to accept it than by starting young? In the schools, get children used to having the police on every corridor corner. That there is no such thing as a minor infringement that can be dealt with by standard school punishments, detention, suspension, not allowing them to take place in other school activities (sports etc). Every infringement is criminal and must be dealt with by the police.
Training has started for our future police-state society.
The problem is, it's often not a case of winning or losing the legal argument.
The cost of trying to win the argument can be greater than you can afford, so often cases can be decided purely on the amount of funds available to either party. Sorta "whoever blinks first loses" where 'blinks' is "runs out of money".
It could cost several million dollars to defend such a suit.
That is one of the purposes behind various anti-SLAPP statuettes passed in some states, where they recognise that the mere act of defending oneself against a frivolous lawsuit can send you bankrupt before a judgement before a court verdict is even reached.
He doesn't have a patent. He has a copyright on a specific piece of software that is a specific implementation of an email system created at least a decade after other implementations of email systems like the AUTODIN network referenced on the wikipedia article about email.
These statements also resulted in a wave of efforts by others to discredit Dr. Ayyadurai and erase him from the history of electronic communications, attacks on Wikipedia that remove reference to his contribution,...
I think that quote would be more accurate if it read:
"These statements also resulted in a wave of efforts by others to correct the disinformation spread by Dr. Ayyadurai and correctly state his place in the history of electronic communications, edits on wikipedia that more accurately reflect the history..."
Based on the writing style of that post, are you sure you're not 14 years old?
Sorry, but it was a bit of a wade, and I'm still not sure I understand all of it. I'm not a stickler for spelling and grammar, but there's a difference between being not formally correct and being incomprehensible.
Looking at this purely analytically, not regarding whether it's a police union or some other type of body...
I'd think that that sort of tactic would destroy the paying members confidence in their organisation that they are paying to protect and advocate for them. Where for what their management perceive to be good members they go all out, launch PR campaigns etc. But for what they perceive as bad - but still paying the same membership fee - members, they don't do all that...wouldn't that destroy your faith in them as an organisation?
If I was in such a union who undertook those tactics, I'd be leaving it and finding a different one who treated all their members the same.
OK, I just did a quick read up of champerty and maintenance on wikipipedia. According to that font of absolute truth, while these acts in my opinion do fall under the definition (as provided by wikipedia!) of champerty and maintenance, the problem is that, also according to wikipedia, it is no longer a crime to do so in many jurisdictions. Therefore it doesn't matter whether or not it is that, because if it is it's not legally wrong to do so.
So that there is more reason to force upgrades on consumers.
When I was a kid, a TV was like a fridge or washing machine - you'd buy a new one every decade or so. Maybe have a 2nd smaller one for the kids, which is most likely a hand-me-down from when the main TV was upgraded to an OMG 68cm so the 48cm it was replacing was moved off to the kids room.
But by incorporating many unnecessary technologies in the TV - media players, web browsers, players for specific eco-systems (netflix, amazon etc) that aren't upgradeable, or that they only support for a year or 2 with upgrades (like a mobile phone), there are more opportunities to foist upgrades on users.