|
|
Post by mightymightyaztecs on Jul 22, 2010 19:42:45 GMT -8
www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/copyright-trolling-for-dollars/You've all probably heard by now of the lawsuits filed against blogs and forums for posting news articles. Well, they're really stepping it up. That douchebag above see's himself as the new RIAA and is "scouring the internet" for anyone to sue. Since I spend way too much time on this site and don't want to see it shut down I'd just like to remind everyone to post links, not text. I don't think it's even safe anymore to post a few sentences. Definitely never post or even link to anything from the LV-RJ.
|
|
|
|
Post by William L. Rupp on Jul 22, 2010 20:01:18 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by William L. Rupp on Jul 22, 2010 20:07:28 GMT -8
I will add one more thought. Relying on lawsuits against blogs is one pathetic, and I would say futile, business plan. This may help the lawyers for a time, but it will not prevent the decline of print journalism.
Meanwhile, let's steer clear of anything with a Las Vegas dateline!
WLR
|
|
|
|
Post by mightymightyaztecs on Jul 22, 2010 20:43:40 GMT -8
I will add one more thought. Relying on lawsuits against blogs is one pathetic, and I would say futile, business plan. This may help the lawyers for a time, but it will not prevent the decline of print journalism. Meanwhile, let's steer clear of anything with a Las Vegas dateline! WLR That's the thing. Just like the music industry earlier last decade, the print news industry is struggling to adapt to changing technologies. Now everyone and their mom has a blog or a forum and people like to cross-post information they find. So instead of finding new and innovative ways to profit from people linking to them, they just decided to follow in the footsteps of the music industry and just sue all the little guys. Way to go! I'm sure people are really going to rush out to buy newspapers now. Jackasses. |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jul 23, 2010 7:14:33 GMT -8
The answer is to simply boycot that paper that sold off their copyrights in total: do not post about them, to not link to them, do not read them. The music industry had declining sales in the early to mid 80s and attempted to blame dubbing cassettes for their problem, the problem then was lousy single-based music, now with a real threat of digital means, they return to single based music. Just as when faced with the 24 news cycle, web sites and blogs posting ap and wire stories instantly when they are published, they got rid of, trimmed or merged the local sections and went with more ap and wire stories - what is wrong with this picture? - People can get national stories immediately but not necessarily local stories, so they get rid of local coverage and print ap articles that people read on yahoo when checking their email or typed into google and hit news 15 hours ago? I wonder why they failed
|
|
|
|
Post by Village Aztec on Jul 23, 2010 8:06:17 GMT -8
Look in to putting ownership in the name of a trust. Do the same for all your assets. If you can't figure out why, then your in for a hard life. I will not tell you why.
Nolo press is a good source.
I am not practicing law, just giving you a heads up.
Every one needs asset protection.
Read an become your own expert. That go's for everything in your life. Take time off from reading this board and get into the game of life.
You can't give to SDSU when you die if you have lost your money due to law suits.
You can pay someone to cut your grass or hire someone.
It took me years to figure this out. With the internet it will take you a half hour.
Will an Aztec attorney step up and help educate people, or do they have to go to a USD attorney?
Always seek advice of a professional.
SDSU will help you.
I am thinking about giving SDSU some money to provide income for the life of my son. I have a reason to do this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2010 8:38:45 GMT -8
I will add one more thought. Relying on lawsuits against blogs is one pathetic, and I would say futile, business plan. This may help the lawyers for a time, but it will not prevent the decline of print journalism. Meanwhile, let's steer clear of anything with a Las Vegas dateline! It's particularly pathetic if the suit is filed without first having issued a warning to the alleged offender, which these guys may or may not be doing. If not and they sue in California, they may just get SLAPPed down. |
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Jul 23, 2010 9:22:11 GMT -8
Some, not all, lawyers are just such slime.  This guy probably also goes to business and sues under the handicapped access laws. |
|
|
|
Post by montyismyhomie on Jul 23, 2010 9:38:52 GMT -8
this reminds me of when i got suspended in high school for copying my homework from someone. the only catch was that i was just copying definitions to the words from my spelling list which i would have invariably copied from a dictionary in a similar manner to begin with. i pitched that argument to the vice principal and he waffled for a bit almost agreeing with me but said it was irrelevant in the end.
my feminist teacher caught a girl doing the same thing the next week and didn't do anything (sigh)...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2010 10:29:49 GMT -8
Some, not all, lawyers are just such slime. This guy probably also goes to business and sues under the handicapped access laws. There was an L.A. attorney who became rather notorious for that in the nineties. He actually had an unemployed regular client who was wheelchair bound who would travel around to restaurants, document their failure to provide complete accessibility and then use the attorney to sue. Eventually a restaurant owners association's legal counsel got back at the attorney by filing SLAPP suits against the attorney and the client. I don't recall the facts specifically but IIRC, in order to have standing to initiate a handicapped access suit a plaintiff has to be an actual patron of the defendant restaurant and the association's legal counsel did a sting in which they proved that the client only rarely actually ate in the restaurants. Things like many of them being nowhere near his residence (since he had already sued all of the local ones), that he would get off the bus, enter the restaurant and immediately enter the restroom and then just leave, etc. and that the attorney was aware of that yet represented him anyway. I think the attorney may even have gotten into hot water with the Bar. |
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Jul 23, 2010 19:57:50 GMT -8
Some, not all, lawyers are just such slime. This guy probably also goes to business and sues under the handicapped access laws. There was an L.A. attorney who became rather notorious for that in the nineties. He actually had an unemployed regular client who was wheelchair bound who would travel around to restaurants, document their failure to provide complete accessibility and then use the attorney to sue. Eventually a restaurant owners association's legal counsel got back at the attorney by filing SLAPP suits against the attorney and the client. I don't recall the facts specifically but IIRC, in order to have standing to initiate a handicapped access suit a plaintiff has to be an actual patron of the defendant restaurant and the association's legal counsel did a sting in which they proved that the client only rarely actually ate in the restaurants. Things like many of them being nowhere near his residence (since he had already sued all of the local ones), that he would get off the bus, enter the restaurant and immediately enter the restroom and then just leave, etc. and that the attorney was aware of that yet represented him anyway. I think the attorney may even have gotten into hot water with the Bar. Well, we certainly wouldn't want the handicapped to have equal access, now would we. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 23, 2010 20:57:27 GMT -8
There was an L.A. attorney who became rather notorious for that in the nineties. He actually had an unemployed regular client who was wheelchair bound who would travel around to restaurants, document their failure to provide complete accessibility and then use the attorney to sue. Eventually a restaurant owners association's legal counsel got back at the attorney by filing SLAPP suits against the attorney and the client. I don't recall the facts specifically but IIRC, in order to have standing to initiate a handicapped access suit a plaintiff has to be an actual patron of the defendant restaurant and the association's legal counsel did a sting in which they proved that the client only rarely actually ate in the restaurants. Things like many of them being nowhere near his residence (since he had already sued all of the local ones), that he would get off the bus, enter the restaurant and immediately enter the restroom and then just leave, etc. and that the attorney was aware of that yet represented him anyway. I think the attorney may even have gotten into hot water with the Bar. Well, we certainly wouldn't want the handicapped to have equal access, now would we. I hate to have to be the one who breaks the news to you, but here goes. Your response is favored to win the prize for Most Egregious Example of Totally Missing the Point. AzWm |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2010 9:34:38 GMT -8
Well, we certainly wouldn't want the handicapped to have equal access, now would we. I hate to have to be the one who breaks the news to you, but here goes. Your response is favored to win the prize for Most Egregiouis Example of Totally Missing the Point. AzWm Thanks, William. Couldn't have put it better myself. |
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Jul 24, 2010 19:04:26 GMT -8
I hate to have to be the one who breaks the news to you, but here goes. Your response is favored to win the prize for Most Egregiouis Example of Totally Missing the Point. AzWm Thanks, William. Couldn't have put it better myself. This is a learning opportunity for me. As was related on an earlier post regarding the lawsuits for music file sharing, once a charge is implemented to access the newspaper websites would all this be moot? I mean, if I'm paying to access that toilet paper that would now be the LV Review Journal website, would I have the freedom to transfer information I retrieve on this site?? I have no clue, but I'm curious. |
|
|
|
Post by mightymightyaztecs on Jul 24, 2010 19:27:36 GMT -8
Thanks, William. Couldn't have put it better myself. This is a learning opportunity for me. As was related on an earlier post regarding the lawsuits for music file sharing, once a charge is implemented to access the newspaper websites would all this be moot? I mean, if I'm paying to access that toilet paper that would now be the LV Review Journal website, would I have the freedom to transfer information I retrieve on this site?? I have no clue, but I'm curious. Nope. You don't see anyone posting Rivals or ESPN Insider articles here do you? Paying for something doesn't necessarily grant you to right to transfer it, especially in the case of copyrighted material in which case transferring it negates the whole purpose of putting up a paywall. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jul 24, 2010 19:41:09 GMT -8
This is a learning opportunity for me. As was related on an earlier post regarding the lawsuits for music file sharing, once a charge is implemented to access the newspaper websites would all this be moot? I mean, if I'm paying to access that toilet paper that would now be the LV Review Journal website, would I have the freedom to transfer information I retrieve on this site?? I have no clue, but I'm curious. Nope. You don't see anyone posting Rivals or ESPN Insider articles here do you? Paying for something doesn't necessarily grant you to right to transfer it, especially in the case of copyrighted material in which case transferring it negates the whole purpose of putting up a paywall. I'm still wondering; if a website has an option of emailing an article to a friend or another website does that original website still have the ability to sue? Either way, as someone who has been sued due to something I "republished" on an earlier iteration of AT and got stuck with 3 grand in attorney fees even though the litigation against me was determined to be a SLAPP suit and tossed out, I'd seriously advise everyone on here to offer nothing more that a synopsis of an article that offers no actual text and a link. Basically, I paid a 3 grand retainer. As the months rolled by I kept getting bills that I didn't pay because I assumed, based upon what my lawyer told me, that the outcome would be in my favor. That turned out to be the case, but the judge ruled that some of the attorney fees were charged for trial prep and couldn't be charged to the plaintiff. Fortunately the law firm agreed to drop all fees beyond the 3 grand, but it still cost me 3 farking grand for bull$#!+ litigation. Then again, my lawyer argued to his firm in my favor and I will always be very thankful that he did so. If you get sued for anything, I'll be happy to give you his name and the firm's name. Just email me because he stood me in very good stance. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Jul 24, 2010 20:48:50 GMT -8
This is a learning opportunity for me. As was related on an earlier post regarding the lawsuits for music file sharing, once a charge is implemented to access the newspaper websites would all this be moot? I mean, if I'm paying to access that toilet paper that would now be the LV Review Journal website, would I have the freedom to transfer information I retrieve on this site?? I have no clue, but I'm curious. Nope. You don't see anyone posting Rivals or ESPN Insider articles here do you? Paying for something doesn't necessarily grant you to right to transfer it, especially in the case of copyrighted material in which case transferring it negates the whole purpose of putting up a paywall. Can still learn something by just asking. I sincerely appreciate the heads up. A nasty business. |
|
|
|
Post by mightymightyaztecs on Jul 24, 2010 22:10:33 GMT -8
Nope. You don't see anyone posting Rivals or ESPN Insider articles here do you? Paying for something doesn't necessarily grant you to right to transfer it, especially in the case of copyrighted material in which case transferring it negates the whole purpose of putting up a paywall. Can still learn something by just asking. I sincerely appreciate the heads up. A nasty business. No problem, always glad to help a fellow Aztec. Sucks that some people make a living off filing lawsuits but that's the world we live in. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2010 11:15:29 GMT -8
Sucks that some people make a living off filing lawsuits but that's the world we live in. It depends on the circumstances. I'm no fan of John Edwards but although before becoming a politician he was a plaintiff's lawyer, he was not an ambulance chaser. I read an article about the guy in which it detailed an injured client who had gotten jerked around big time by a large corporation which wasn't going to own up to its negligence. Edwards took the case on a contingency basis and therefore would have gotten nothing had he lost. Instead, he won millions from the jury, including in punitive damages to let the corporation know how wrong its conduct was. The handicap access attorney I mentioned above was a far sight different from John Edwards as a plaintiff's lawyer. Exactly what kind of attorney this guy in Vegas is remains to be seen. |
|
|
|
Post by mattpohl on Jul 25, 2010 17:25:55 GMT -8
If the lawyers aren't slimy, their profession certainly is. Hang in there, Matt Some, not all, lawyers are just such slime. This guy probably also goes to business and sues under the handicapped access laws. |
|
This guy probably also goes to business and sues under the handicapped access laws.