-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Legal fund for Reviewers/Erin?
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
But not credible. He's got to pay a lawyer and court fees, then will be subject to discovery and risks of SLAPP and countersuits. If he were that stupid, his lawyer would explain this to him. He's likely not that stupid, just stupid enough to try that useless bullying tactic.
I think people continue to forget that -especially in the USA- everybody has the right to sue, and threaten to sue. You don't have to like it (I certainly don't). Whether or not it'll go anywhere is neither here nor there. If you publish stuff, you may get a call from someone's lawyer for a myriad of reasons... not crediting them, attributing falsehoods (defamation), comparative inaccuracies etc.
It's every professional's job to protect themselves. I pay all of $17 a month for a basic legal insurance, which I luckily never needed to use. But I think it's the lazy way to ask readers to pay into a legal fund that protects any amateur with growing pro ambitions. Be a pro to begin with and protect yourself. My surgery doctor doesn't ask me to tip him $100 into his insurance fund in case something goes wrong with my knee surgery so he's safe... he probably pays a lot in insurance to conduct business. So should everybody that makes a living out of something that potentially creates disputes and liability (which is pretty much everything). To ask others for protection doesn't project an image of being a confident subject matter expert/professional. In which case I have zero interest in reading that stuff.
Why should I contribute to a legal fund when I honestly have zero idea how good the protected writers are, what they write about, or what will happen with the money if no legal cases ever arise?
None of this has anything to do with the integrity or expertise from the two vendors that triggered these discussions (nor of course the writers'). For the vendors, it was either a publicity disaster or a storm in a teapot, who knows. I am most definitely not on their side, but it's their right to be *ssh*oles. And if a writer has never given any thought on how they'd react a-priori, and their only response is be scared and run for help - perhaps they are not made for the technical writing business.
It's every professional's job to protect themselves. I pay all of $17 a month for a basic legal insurance, which I luckily never needed to use. But I think it's the lazy way to ask readers to pay into a legal fund that protects any amateur with growing pro ambitions. Be a pro to begin with and protect yourself. My surgery doctor doesn't ask me to tip him $100 into his insurance fund in case something goes wrong with my knee surgery so he's safe... he probably pays a lot in insurance to conduct business. So should everybody that makes a living out of something that potentially creates disputes and liability (which is pretty much everything). To ask others for protection doesn't project an image of being a confident subject matter expert/professional. In which case I have zero interest in reading that stuff.
Why should I contribute to a legal fund when I honestly have zero idea how good the protected writers are, what they write about, or what will happen with the money if no legal cases ever arise?
None of this has anything to do with the integrity or expertise from the two vendors that triggered these discussions (nor of course the writers'). For the vendors, it was either a publicity disaster or a storm in a teapot, who knows. I am most definitely not on their side, but it's their right to be *ssh*oles. And if a writer has never given any thought on how they'd react a-priori, and their only response is be scared and run for help - perhaps they are not made for the technical writing business.
Last edited:
It doesn't matter.
Even if he has his lawyer send nasty grams, you will have to respond which means getting a lawyer.
Just walking in... they want a retainer... depending on the issue ... lets say 5K.
Long before anyone actually files a lawsuit... you can rack up legal fees going back and forth, even if its frivolous.
(I've been there)
It is a bullying tactic which you have to take seriously.
Usually you end up getting a lawyer to negotiate a way out of a lawsuit. Even if one hasn't been filed.
No you don't.
AFAIK, there's only been like one or two cases in the audio review sector in the past, oh, 50 years? I'm happy to be corrected if this is wrong. The only one that comes to mind had a very large deep pockets defendant (CU). I'm in more danger of getting hit by lightning, which is why I have no trepidations about calling scam artists and fraudsters what they are.
Which typically results in a negotiation and rewording of a few sentences. I have been there in the corporate world (and not for stuff I wrote, I just get dragged into such disputes). Waste of $. Much better to give someone a direct call and start with "Can we do tis the nice way?". I went through that 2 months ago when the company I work for published a competitive report, which included 2 perceived inaccuracies. But we resolved it with zero lawyer intervention in a mutually satisfactory way. But there *was* a threat of lawyers.
His product may be real, but it is also real bad.
A charlatan falsely claims special expertise or attributes for commercial purposes.
It's difficult to prove a charlatan false when many people buy/believe their stuff, though. And it's become very mainstream.
Emlin
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2018
- Messages
- 1,045
- Likes
- 1,453
But that doesn't alter the fact that they are charlatans.It's difficult to prove a charlatan false when people buy/believe their stuff, though. And it's become very mainstream.
I never claimed it did. I am just saying the burden of proof is on the person calling someone else a charlatan, and the charlatan may threaten to sue. In which case you may have to take pack the public "charlatan" comment and be way more specific. That's the way these things work. Watch out which public figure you call a "charlatan" if you have a platform many people follow and makes you money. That's all I am saying.
The two cases that triggered this were very different in nature, in my opinion, but I don't want to perpetuate the discussion.
Last edited:
lol. Threatening to sue over this would be even dumber than what he already did. Like standing in the village square with your finger up your nose screaming “I am not an idiot”.
Emlin
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2018
- Messages
- 1,045
- Likes
- 1,453
And yet he threatened to sue.
Maybe… But, as an engineer, why does he keep churning variants of the same unconventional-but-ultimately-not-that-great design (his medium/tweeter array) at higher and higher price point?
The only rational answer I can think of: he is more a businessman-designer than an engineer-designer… Add the lawsuit threats… He is a charlatan!
People have sued over far more frivolous, stupid stuff.
Stupidity is an inexhaustible resource. If only we could power the grid with it.
It's powering something, for sure.
Emlin
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2018
- Messages
- 1,045
- Likes
- 1,453
X and other social media platforms seem to be powered by it already.
The magic word is "discovery."
I have worked in Silicon Valley for 25 years of my life. Even VCs with billion dollar funds packed with top MBAs can suck at "discovery". And a certain amount of charlatanerie is required by every company, we all know. "The Ultimate Driving Machine"? "Think Different?". "Open Happiness"? We go down so hard on some audio companies, but even the largest companies out there make indefensible charlatan claims. Of course they pitch hard, within legal bounds they explored and are educated in. Consumer beware, as always - vendors are trying to get your $$$... oh the surprise!
Similar threads
