|
|
|
|
|
by mschuster91
1370 days ago
|
|
> Then the onus is onto the one who sent the notice in the first place to gather evidence and take you to court. In theory, there's fines for false notices if they can't prove anything. The problem is, in the worst case Joe Random has to go to court over a snippet of music that randomly blasted from a passing car in a youtube video and risk going to battle with, say, Sony Music - a conglomerate with eight billion dollars yearly revenue. Many cannot take on that level of financial risk, not just the risk from the court verdict itself (punitive/damages) but also the cost of all the lawyers involved. And at that point, we're in kangaroo court territory - when people have the theoretical right to due process but practically cannot use that right due to the risk involved, it's nothing short of the foundation of democracy being undermined. We need a cap on lawyer costs and damage awards so that the 99% can have their fair day in court against the 1% again without having to fear going bankrupt. At the moment, the only resource the 99% have is to go to the media and raise a stink, but the success chance for that route is probably on the same order as a lottery win. |
|