Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by tomkarho 253 days ago
Victory against small fish => establish legal precedence

legal precedence => Surer victory in the future for similar lawsuits

4 comments

Reminds me of the Apple vs Pear law suit

https://www.entrepreneur.com/business-news/apple-sues-small-...

The dispute was settled because Pear agreed to slightly alter its logo, instead of continuing full litigation (maybe because of resources / dollars it would consume)

Seems there is a scraping precedent already, set by Linkedin v HiQ

https://www.fbm.com/publications/what-recent-rulings-in-hiq-...

Only if the case goes to trial.

If they settle, or the case got dismissed -- no precedent is set.

If that’s going to happen with a small fish then it was certainly going to happen against a big fish. Cheaper, faster, and easier to attack a smaller business first. There is literally no reason to go after a big dog unless they did something particularly egregious and/or distinct that you can anchor your argument with. Unless your goal is just to waste their time and that of their lawyers I guess, though I think we would all assume the goal is to win ultimately.
Even the legal filing and motions can help shape a case since they get rulings and such back. If a judge rejects a motion, maybe they need to approach it a different way when they go after big fish.

Only way this is not beneficial is if software company settle or gets dismissed right away.

Against bigger fish.

And there's always a bigger fish.