Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:The only problem I see... (Score 1) 215

As opposed to facebook which set the share prices way too high and gave no one else proper voting rights... this guys is a total head case. He should just absolve it all, give what money back he can, and move on. I got through most of page one but I do not even know if I want to read the rest to see if he redeems himself in any way.

Submission + - Jammie Thomas Denied Supreme Court Appeal (theverge.com)

sarysa writes: The Supreme Court has refused to hear the latest appeal of the 7 year old Jammie Thomas case, regarding a single mother who was fined $222,000 in her most recent appeal for illegally sharing 24 songs. Those of us hoping for an Eighth Amendment battle over this issue will not be seeing it anytime soon. In spite of the harsh penalties, the journalist suggests that: "Still, the RIAA is sensitive about how it looks if they impoverish a woman of modest means. Look for them to ask her for far less than the $222,000."

Comment Re:Sad (Score 1) 229

But does it really take that much work? Why do you even need such a huge number of lawyers for what appears to be a pretty simple case?

As I said, the judiciary has a number of rules, and engages in many practices, which make the cost of lawyering more expensive than it needs to be. I could write a book on the subject.

No it doesn't need as many hours of legal work as most big firms put into a case, which is why a good small firm like mine is wildly more efficient than the big firms, and can beat much bigger firms day in and day out. But under the rules and practices in place, it's still an unnecessarily expensive undertaking to litigate.

I don't make the rules; but I have to live with them in my daily life.

Comment Re:Sad (Score 1) 229

I just honestly don't understand where all the money goes.

The money goes to pay lawyers. With expensive cases, these days it's usually large teams of clones run by large, usually multistate, often multinational, law firms. The judiciary has a number of rules and engage in a number of practices which are based on the assumption that the parties have endless means with which to pay lawyers, and which benefit the large law firms and the wealthier clients who can afford them. So the real fault is with the judiciary.

Woe betide the client with limited means, and woe betide the small law firms that get caught up in these affairs if their clients don't have that kind of dough. My small law firm can kick the butt of any large law firm, but only if we have a client that can afford to pay the bills.

Comment Re:That word doesn't mean what you think it means (Score 1) 229

Ideals like, it's ok to make treaties with other nations and then break them. It's ok to invade and steal someone else's land. It's ok to have colonies and empire, so long as you don't call them that. It's ok for big business to hire thugs to shoot workers who just want a fair deal. Yeah, the USA is exceptional alright.

Hey have you been reading about our actual history? Don't you know that's not permitted.

Comment Re:Sad (Score 4, Interesting) 229

For justice to prevail the loser HAS to pay all court costs. Period!

You're wrong if you thing that will improve access to the courts; it would only make it worse. It would make it an even higher stakes poker game. The real things that would improve access to justice are such things as (a) making it easier rather than harder to bring class actions, (b) making it easier rather than harder for other forms of contingent cases, (c) investing money in civil legal aid, (d) developing laws to encourage prepaid legal services, and (e) the courts not bending the law -- as they sometimes do -- to accommodate large corporations abusing the judicial system (see my article on how the RIAA was given numerous unfair advantages by the courts in its war against ordinary people: "Large Recording Companies vs The Defenseless", ABA Judges Journal, Equal Access to Justice issue, 2008)

Comment Re:Sad (Score 1) 229

Even though Veoh is out of business the record companies lost a lot in this. Veoh may be gone but any attempt to treat someone else this way will cause severe penalties. You can run this scam once and then the courts get wise to it and punish you for trying to sue someone when it was made clear to you previously that you didn't have a case. Anyone else they sue will get attorney fees and the right to counter sue for harassment.

From your mouth to God's ears. (old Yiddish saying)

Slashdot Top Deals

If I have not seen so far it is because I stood in giant's footsteps.

Working...