Posted on 12/22/2009 5:32:22 PM PST by Halfmanhalfamazing
WASHINGTON, Dec. 10 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Two small business owners and the founder of a nonprofit organization - all targets of abusive lawsuits - are speaking out about their legal ordeals at www.FacesOfLawsuitAbuse.org as part of a nationwide public awareness campaign launched today by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (ILR) that demonstrates how abusive lawsuits affect real people in very real ways.
If the lawsuits are frivolous, the Plaintiff’s lawyers should be sanctioned, like Orly Taitz was sanctioned. Plaintiffs who abuse the legal process can be kept from filing any lawsuits without first getting the permission of the Court.
parsy, who says there is recourse for mis-using the legal system
I’ve got one for you;
We have a website that has been built over the course of 12 years, adding and subtracting by various builders. At no time, to the best of our knowledge, have we ever used anything but stock photos (other than our own in-house photo shoots) for things like two guys shaking hands, operator at switch board, etc.
I explain the circumstances and ask when they acquired this or has it ever been in public domain (they are famous for “freebies” to entice people into subscriptions), or if, in fact, they can say when they obtained the license, bearing in mind this particular shot is 12+ years old. In addition, I doubt that any of the three agencies that have worked on this over this time would have fudged on a stock shot that was not even used in tact.
FU, pay me, comes the response.
FU, prove I’m guilty of something is mine.
Heading to Small Claims court.
I wouldn’t pay UNTOLD THOUSANDS to these bstrds to prove I was INNOCENT of that which they say I am guilty.
Haven’t heard anything yet, but will cheerfully spend a day in court.
If you are legally uninformed, I will tell you, it is a very intimidating letter. I took the time to do a Google and Yahoo search on “Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter”. I think if you do the same, you will get a very interesting education. It is actually devious because Getty Images do not do anyone the courtesy of a Cease and Desist Letter, which is standard in cases like this, to let people know that they did the wrong thing and allow them to correct the situation.
Business corporations don’t have all the rights of persons in a lot of copyright dispute situations. For example Microsoft can take you to the cleaners for software that your business in fact bought, if you lose the receipts.
“Business corporations don’t have all the rights of persons in a lot of copyright dispute situations. For example Microsoft can take you to the cleaners for software that your business in fact bought, if you lose the receipts.”
I don’t think this is the same kind of case and the image, which has been cropped, has no tags and is barely recognizable and is 12 years old and has been handled by 3 agencies. I’m not going to pay. I might lose, but this is insane. They have yet to prove they have had the right to charge for the image and have never offered it for the last 12 years. I’ll start there, I guess. Don’t you have to prove you have the right to collect a bill before demanding payment? Two of the agencies are out of business...they were print only...the third says they can look and see if they any record, but don’t want to start a hunt through 12 years for nothing. Can’t blame them. i think they are just hoping people will pay to avoid the pain. I’m kinda into pain these days...
When my current business partner and I started our business, our former employer sued us for violating a “non-compete” agreement, which it wasn’t. They also accused of of several practices (stealing client list, stealing employees, stealing “proprietary” formulas, which were developed by NIOSH, ACGIH, and OSHA and used industry wide). We spent about 10k for a lawyer. We had witnesses (myself included) and documentation that they had obtained client lists, price lists, employee lists of their major competitor in our town when they opened their office. We were asking for a directed judgement. One week before we were to go to court, they dropped the lawsuit. Our “non-compete” was a common form letter stating that we wouldn’t release proprietary information, not an agreement not to start a competing company, which we would never have been so stupid as to sign.
Small businesses could use a good course or two in partitioning and legal isolation strategies.
The navy partitions its ships so no one torpedo or blas will flood the whole ship.
similarly small businesses should partition their businesses the same way.
Auto shop for example: big liablities all around.
perhaps one entity (a trust of sorts) would own all the tools, another owns all the computers. A third and so on would own the rest of the assets and finally, the owner borrows money against all equipment that is owned free and clear. When you borrow money and live off of it, it isn’t income and the equipment is now encumbered which reduces the possability that a lawyer can check to see what assets are free and clear.
I’m considering “licensing” all my business intellectual property from a “ahem” corporation in NV. Sorry, all my “extra” income is owed to Corp X in another state....and the licensing fees are really really high leaving me with just enough to get by.
IF I was to worry about frivolous lawsuits I might consider some of these strategies...I read about them in a comic book once ;-)
Never can be too careful these days - everyone wants a free lunch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.