Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Copyright Trolls Sue Bloggers, Defense Lawyers

Posted by samzenpus on from the if-you-don't-have-anything-nice-to-say dept.

davecb writes "Prenda Law has commenced three defamation, libel and conspiracy suits against: defense lawyers, defendants and all the blogger and commentators at 'Die Troll Die' and 'Fight Copyright Trolls'. The suits, in different state courts, each attempt to identify anyone who has criticized Prenda, fine them $200,000 each for stating their opinions, and prohibit them from ever criticizing Prenda again."

4 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Thats a lot of lawsuits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if the Troll knows they will probably have to pay all the defendents costs if they lose?

    1. Re:Thats a lot of lawsuits... by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wonder if the Troll knows they will probably have to pay all the defendents costs if they lose?

      You don't live in the USA. Am I right?

      That's how law works in the UK. My best friend is a lawyer (we're both Americans) and he's taught me a lot about how the law really works. One of the things he taught me is that it's incredibly difficult in the USA to get costs paid, even when the lawsuit is frivolous. The problem is that courts in general really don't like to award this kind of thing because all judges and lawyers feel that the system works pretty well, darn near close to perfect, as it is right now and anything that punishes people for bringing lawsuits and losing would "hurt the little man" who will be too afraid to pursue his justified lawsuit against some true injustice because he might lose and have to pay the other guy's court costs. So almost certainly this will not be a factor, although if the defendants are attorneys they might push for it anyway as they know the system well enough that it might give them a slightly better chance of getting it than would normally happen.

  2. Re:Sorry, Prenda by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    in the UK at least I can claim loss of earnings from the litigant when I win the case

    Is that true in general, or only in specific circumstances?

    I was called as a third party witness in a minor court case a while back. One of the things that surprised me was that the accused, having been found not guilty, did not seem to be entitled to much in the way of compensation at all. This was a criminal case, though, not a civil one.

    In that case, the defendant had been charged with an offence, presumably suffered more than a year of distress with the case hanging over them before it was finally resolved, spent whatever time and money it cost them to mount their own defence (they represented themselves in court), and obviously incurred the lost time and inconvenience of having to attend court itself. I was genuinely disappointed in our legal system when it seemed they were sent on their way as if they should somehow be grateful that, after suffering all of that distress and inconvenience, at least they hadn't been found guilty of what they'd been charged with and fined/thrown in jail.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  3. Re:Sorry, Prenda by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And there is nothing wrong with putting incompetent professionals out of business. I'm a doctor and if I start being negligent and killing people I would deserve being run out of the profession because I have to stop being a doctor one way or another. A true professional stops long before he reaches that point and doesn't bite off more than he can reasonably chew. The consequences can be dire, and what's worse it's someone else that suffers them. So yeah, run them out of business and they can find a new career parking cars.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.