Featured Articles

TSMC: Volume production of 16nm FinFET in 2H 2015

TSMC: Volume production of 16nm FinFET in 2H 2015

TSMC has announced that it will begin volume production of 16nm FinFET products in the second half of 2015, in late…

More...
AMD misses earnings targets, announces layoffs

AMD misses earnings targets, announces layoffs

AMD has missed earnings targets and is planning a substantial job cuts. The company reported quarterly earnings yesterday and the street is…

More...
Did Google botch the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9?

Did Google botch the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9?

As expected, Google has finally released the eagerly awaited Nexus 6 phablet and its first 64-bit device, the Nexus 9 tablet.

More...
Gainward GTX 970 Phantom previewed

Gainward GTX 970 Phantom previewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Monday, 18 June 2012 10:48

Lazy lawyers use robots to sue file sharers

Written by Nick Farrell



If you would like to pay press button one


Prenda Law, a firm hired by porn companies, has been relying on robocalls to inform people on the start of a lawsuit.

According to Dietrolldie filesharers are run up by a robot who claims to be someone from Prenda Law. It said that the file sharer had ignored the company's offer to settle being expired now for more than 30 days it is pretty clear to them that you don’t plan to enter into a settlement agreement with them.

Basically the call tells the file sharer about the court process but it is also a last minute pressure to get the person to pay up. The whole thing is dodgy. In some states, robocalls are considered illegal. If a defendant hires an laywer, the plaintiff is not allowed to contact him directly.

The tactic could also be considered unethical as it violates, among others, the Illinois Registration and Disciplinary Commission’s Rules of Professional Conduct because the robot could be seen as giving legal advice to an unrepresented person.

Nick Farrell

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments