HAN/VKT question

[adam]

Now at same time.. Don't get me wrong.. Even if it is a "better" firm, it doesn't make their b.s. claims have any more merit than it did before.  Arguably, it is even more reprehensible that a firm of greater standing would take this on that perhaps a desperate one man show.  As to some of the "statements of fact" made by the lawyers (such as trumped up penalties of removing copyright images when the target simply wouldn't even know how AND technical analysis of the image would indicate removal of watermark / copyright to be b.s. because of the quality of the image - that's been discussed here and something my own designer has pointed out as well .. supporting the seeding of high quality originals) it is in my opinion much worse that reputable firms would be making false statements to induce a settlement under duress. 

Further, on the flip side, one can hope that these "real firms" demanded "real money" and aren't just working on a contingency deal.  If that's the case, it may cost HAN more to negotiate and deal with any issues or counters raised than using a 1 man shop that needs the business a bit more.  Part of HAN's equation has to be that settlement amounts are sufficient to make money in excess of legal payoffs, while being sufficiently less than the cost of someone properly defending it and shutting their racket down.  It seems they are learning from the forums though and the concept that they only use crappy lawyers, and they have tried to elevate that impression.  (combined with actually filing some suits last week).

Again, it can work both ways though.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I agree, and these frims probably get a percentage of the claimed demand from those that roll over and pay, it's just a matter of time when they will come knocking on the wrong door and the recipient decides to fight back and file a counter suit, I'd bet money that HAN would be looking to bail rather quickly as opposed to seeing it thru, as it would cost them, remember they are looking to make a quick buck by scaring people into paying. They are playing the odds, that most people when faced with litigation, they will settle before it even goes to court...

Maybe an article with a headline titled:

"Well respected, politically motivated Ft. Lauderdale law firm Conrad-Scherer jumps into copyright trolling business!"

would be worthwhile... 

[Mulligan]

Buddhapi, that's what I call a great headline!

[SoylentGreen]

Look, if people think H.A.N. is such a scam, don't pay them.
But, wow!!  I mean wow!!  Don't expect somebody else to sue them and then send you your money back.

On another note... Buddhapi... that's a catchy headline!!



You can make more here:
http://www.imagechef.com/ic/make.jsp?tid=Newspaper+Headline

S.G.

[Moe Hacken]

Adam, I think you're right. The fact that they are a "more reputable" outfit and are motivated to keep bad publicity at bay may be an advantage for the victims of their letter program. In this economic environment, I don't think any politician would want to be associated with destroying small businessmen for profit. Or even a law firm. I wonder if they are unaware of what's going on with their client. I sure hope they read this forum and reconsider their participation. And I certainly hope they paid for all those Getty and iStockphoto images on their home page before the PicScout trollbot find them.