Re: [Leica] Re: web pub baloney & OT (no leica)

["Bryan Caldwell" <bcaldwell@softcom.net>]

Paul,

>>It's about the money, it's not about justice and fair treatment. You,
as an attorney, stand to benefit from a successful issue- and you won't
take a case pro bono unless you have to. Money, therefore, is the underlying
factor.<<

How can you possibly make a statement like this about someone you don't
know? I'm an attorney
and I can assure you that attorneys take pro bono cases all the time for
reasons other than being forced to. Lawyers also often take cases that they
think are unlikely to win, but do so to protect the rights of their clients
or because their clients, who ultimately make the major decisions, choose to
persue actions that are not likely to prevail.

Like Jay, I was also offended by your earllier comments. There are obviously
bad apples in every profession. But, lawyer bashing has remained a largely
accepted expression of the uninformed - both in society and here on the LUG.
(We're used to it from Walt <g!>)

Don't forget that the contingency fee system, to which you seem to be
referring, serves to make the legal system available to those who could not
otherwise afford to seek satisfaction in the courts. Without it, the poor
person who is genuinely injured through the fault of others wouldn't stand a
chance at receiving compensation. It also discourages attorneys for
accepting clients when they have don't have a viable case. I'm not sure
however, that a copyright action is one where many lawyers would necessarily
work on a contingency fee basis.

Bryan


- ----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Schiemer <schiemer@magicnet.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 1999 4:52 AM
Subject: [Leica] Re: web pub baloney & OT (no leica)


> yesterday Jay wrote:
> > I am sorry if you have not had good experience with our justice system,
> > but you do a disservice to all on this list by discouraging others from
> > asserting their legal rights.
>
> I've not had bad experience with attorneys and our legal system- but I
have
> had experience with both, and plenty of it.
> I never discouraged anyone from asserting their 'legal rights'- just
> encouraged them to realize it's not about the propriety of their claim,
it's
> only about the money.
> They should be pragmatic and pessimistic, before they believe they'll get
> their just dessert going through the process. I also preach protection
> first, mark your images before they are released into the public domain.
>
> You said it best right here:
> > The decision whether to bring a case is dependent on many factors
including
> > the potential defendant's ability to pay, the circumstances of the
copying and
> > others.  Personal gain to the attorney should not be a factor.
>
> It's about the money, it's not about justice and fair treatment. You,
> as an attorney, stand to benefit from a successful issue- and you won't
> take a case pro bono unless you have to. Money, therefore, is the
underlying
> factor.
>
> If you are a good attorney you'll advise the client <who has suffered
> copyright theft> that a case is based on a series of steps toward
obtaining
> relief.  At any point in this path the likelihood is equally strong they
> won't prevail, or some other, insurmountable obstacle will prevent
> remuneration. A defense attorneys' goal is to not pay any money.
> A suit is a crap shoot. Good attorneys are good at throwing more crap on
the
> table in the process. Great attorneys know how to shovel shit.
> It's BAD advice to tell the artist there IS money at the end of the
tunnel.
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> With respect to OT. This 'thread' is about putting your images up on the
> web. It may not contain specific hardware related information, but it is
> about photography. Leica cameras are used in this endeavor, and many
persons
> here are interested in getting their Leica made images seen by others.
> If the "herders" among us would refrain from foisting imaginary lines on
the
> group, and learn to use the 'delete' button (especially so when the SUBJ:
> says [NO LEICA])- it'd probably save more bandwidth.
>