My Lawyer says “fuck off”

From Slashdot | RIAA Threatens Harvard Law Prof With Sanctions

Legal language and strength of case (Score:5, Interesting)

by Kupfernigk (1190345) on Friday January 23, @07:37AM (#26573057)

The PDF reminds me of something I have seen before with bad lawyers: the worse the case, the longer and more threatening the language. The RIAA seem to have spotted a new idea: if you want to be e.g. a bank robber or a burglar, become a lawyer. Then when you get caught, you can try to avoid testifying on the grounds of legal privilege.

On the other hand, when you have a strong case things are different. I’m reminded of a business acquaintance who had a case against a powerful US trade group some years ago. His lawyers said the case was unanswerable, spent a morning summarising it on one side of a letter, and sent it off. The other side promptly settled out of court. The other famous example was the UK satirical magazine Private Eye, which once received a long and very threatening letter from the lawyers of a notorious fraudster. Their reply was something on the lines of “We have had your interesting letter and we have taken legal advice. Our lawyers advise us to tell you to f**k off”.

Given this history, the one liner back (in effect “bring it on”) is surely instructive.

Re:Legal language and strength of case (Score:5, Informative)

by Tryfen (216209) on Friday January 23, @07:58AM (#26573199)

The case to which you are referring is Arkell vs Pressdram. []

The salient point is that Arkell’s lawyers wrote to Private Eye saying “Our client’s attitude to damages will depend on the nature of your reply”. Private Eye’s response was “We would be interested to know what your client’s attitude to damages would be if the nature of our reply were as follows: Fuck off”.

I recommend that people take this option more often. I *am* a lawyer – this is legal advice.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Comments are closed.