Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

So wait...

Can't somebody take the precedent set by those lawyers using ChatGPT to whip up nonsense for the court, and take these DMCA mills to tadk for conduct unbecoming for not verifying that, in fact, any software generated flag actually has merit before the Courts?

The Courts have been clear and unambiguous that their time is not to be wasted on BS, and that an attorney has the Duty of Care to ensure that what they vouch for is representative, and truthful.

Why is this still done at the scale it is if, in fact, the Courts are enforcing due rigor?

...The answer likely is, they aren't, and big tech is usurping the authority of the Courts to weigh in, thereby disrupting due process. In doing so, their legal team is committing the same censurious behavior, by advising their client to act unlawfully too.

Frankly, I'd start being thrilled at such notices if I could find an attorney willing to take a shot at holding notice generators to account for false positives, and service providers who cancel service without complying with due process accountable.

In fact, if the Courts were sufficiently dedicated to it, it would create a selection pressure on attorneys to ultimately be truthful, lest they be hunted by one of their fellow attorneys who actually is honest, and willing to check.

Who watches the watchers? Another watcher, with the incentive to reap a reward for proving the falsity of a claim.

Let the attorneys feast on one another for a bit, and eventually we should reestablish some sanity.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: