Chilling Effects Cease & Desist Clearinghouse 192
Wendy Seltzer writes: "The Berkman Center for Internet & Society, EFF, and other major law school clinics have launched ChillingEffects.org to combat the chilling effect of Cease & Desist letters with ungrounded legal threats. (Slashdot readers got a site preview in the story on the Bnetd Cease & Desist, already in our database.)
If you have received a Cease & Desist, we invite you to add it to the database, where law students will analyze the legalese and annotate the C&Ds with Frequently Asked Questions and answers. The site already offers several sets of general legal FAQs."
Go to FuckedCompany.com (Score:1)
This is wonderful. (Score:5, Interesting)
You Mean... (Score:3, Funny)
If you like that (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:He's quite articulate... (Score:2)
The current set of laws are sufficiently laughable. It's already (and long since been) illegal to duplicate a copyrighted work weither that be photocopying a magazine or molecular duplication of a CD. Now we have a set of laws that make it legal to break the law.
Everyone seems to have long since missed the point: If you make something that's work buying, people will buy it.
Re:He's quite articulate... (Score:2)
He's mastered playing dumb, y'know? (Score:2)
Too many people aren't smart enough to play dumb...
Very quick reply (Score:3, Insightful)
At first glance, this looks like a great thing. In fact, what the internet was supposed to be. My only question is - how long will they remain available and maintained? Operations like this tend to get their funding mysteriously cut. Sounds like a job for the EFF to fund?
Re:Very quick reply (Score:1)
How Long.. (Score:5, Funny)
Lost his faith in democracy,
Re:How Long.. (Score:2)
Gotta love it.
How Long? Well... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:How Long.. (Score:2)
Surprisingly, it's already happened [slashdot.org].
Re:How Long.. (Score:2)
*grumble mutter*
Re:How Long.. (Score:2)
excellent (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a *great* idea (Score:4, Interesting)
If the "Clearinghouse" manages to stay up, it will certainly become very useful. One of the worst things about cease-and-desist letters is that the lawyers throw all kinds of threats at you, which you then have to spend time checking into. If you're a small operation, this means a big company can basically bludgeon you to death with cease and desist letters. In fact, we've seen this happening a lot more in the past year.
I'm glad to see this site go up, IMHO it's a victory for the little guy. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the cease and desist climate after word of the site gets around; maybe people will stop throwing cease & desist at everything they don't like. (Heh, that's probably a pipe dream.) Anyway, just my $0.02.
---Crash Windows XP just by viewing a simple text file! [zappadoodle.com]
Re:This is a *great* idea (Score:3, Funny)
Well, it apparently was up before we slashdotted it...
I agree completely (Score:4, Funny)
Join me in protesting for our freedoms! Remember, information (and especially movies like Good Will Hunting) want to be free!
Re:I agree completely (Score:5, Interesting)
O.K., cool!
I use DeCSS-derived software to copy DVDs to my Hard Drive and later to DVD, only this time encoding free!
Also cool, sounds like traditional fair use to me. I too use CSS-defeating software so I can view DVDs I purchased under [GNU/]Linux.
I hand out free copies of DVD movies everywhere I can to as many people as I can, along with a 2600 flier about how bad the DMCA is.
Unless these are movies you made, this is uber-uncool. You should be fighting for fair-use, and reductions of copyight protection terms, not blatently fueling the flames of oppression. Such piracy just proves "them" right. Handing out the 2600 flyer is cool. I wear my anti-DVD/CCA t-shirt proudly, too, and explain what it means when people ask.
I realize that you posted in jest, but civil disobedience isn't about completely ignoring bad law, just orderly refusal to obey those parts of the law that are ill-concieved.
Re:I agree completely (Score:3, Insightful)
O.K., cool!
No, not cool. When you rent a movie, you are borrowing it. (albeit for a fee.) part of the mechanism that renting works on is only one copy is out there at a time. Only one (set of) viewer(s) can watch it at once. When you copy a rented film and keep it for yourself, it is the same as any other sort of piracy. Fair use is fair use of the owner. The owner can loan a copy out, but can't duplicate for others.
This is the exact same as the example "I hand out free copies of DVD movies everywhere I can to as many people as I can," except the loanee is doing the copy, not the loaner.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
I can envision the scenario where someone rents a movie, time and space-shifts it to a DVD (because there is no VCR in the media room, but there is a VCR and DVD writer in, say, the computer room, watches the movie from the DVD in the media room later (still possessing the video), destroys the DVD or erases it (DVD+RW), and returns the movie.
Contrived, admitedly, but perfectly fair use. Who am I to presume this is not what the troll meant ? ;->
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
Besides, he mentioned using a DVD recorder on rented DVDs. Media-shifting isn't an argument here either!
So, it's not fair use. Your example may have been, but the original poster was definitely not.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
I realize that you posted in jest, but civil disobedience isn't about completely ignoring bad law, just orderly refusal to obey those parts of the law that are ill-concieved.
Unfortunately, copyright law is almost entirely bad at this point. Mainly due to incredibly long terms and overly broad protections. By refusing to obey those portions alone, you've pretty much tossed copyright out the window. Should we just adhere to the original copyright terms? Anything more than 28 years old is fair game? Do what you like with what you own, regardless of what the DMCA says? How would you propose to handle it?
Re:I agree completely (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, for starters, I wouldn't presume that there should be no such notion as copyright, as suggested by our trolly friend above. But, neither would I suggest that ideas and writings with essentiually zero cost of reproduction be an indefinite gravy train for the author.
The original copyright terms would be a good start, but even those are too long when it comes to the usefulness of things like software. Five years protection after first deployment sounds better. And, if you produce derivative works, each gets a brand new five year copyright term. So, at worst, the public domain is five years behind the bleeding edge.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
Re:I agree completely (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm curious.
The issue of term limits and fair-use seems like a crucial one, but I'm not sure that it is. Wouldn't the DMCA be just as bad if copyright terms were only 75 years? 50? 14? Isn't the issue really the draconian laws that are being put into place to enforce copyright protection, and not the term of the protection itself?
Would any of us be satisfied with a world in which Skylarov and Johansen could be persecuted as they have been, in which the DMCA, WIPO regulations, and the SSSCA are enforced laws, but copyright terms were shortened to something reasonable?
I wouldn't be. I don't think fair use and copyright protection terms are the issue. I suspect the issue is that copyright laws simply can't effectively be applied to current and future technologies without draconian enforcement procedures being applied.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
Certainly the DMCA and SSSCA are seriously brain-dead even without effectively indefinite copyright terms. However, let's stick to one issue at a time: excessive copyright protections are bad on their face, with or without these other laws.
Furthermore, even with the DMCA as it stands, I think the cases against Sklyarov and Johansen are without merit. Repeat after me: "interoperability". You are right to use the word "persecuted" and not "prosecuted". And, persecuted for what? Exercising simple fair use! Which brings up back to basic copyright law.
So the response to these bad laws should be three fold:
1) Fight excessive copyright terms. Part of the civil disobedience approach to this is to reproduce and redistribute material that has essentially been abandoned by the copyright holder -- so called abandonware.
2) Exercise and defend your right to fair use. Use deCSS, certainly, and openly, but only for interoperability reasons.
3) This addresses the valid issues you raised: fight for the ability to engage in fair use. Technological means to prevent it should not be tolerated.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
The poster was quite clear: this is quite deliberate civil disobedience. If you check your history (US in particular), you will find that significant changes in society come about through mass civil disobedience or armed insurrection, not through debate or polite lobbying by individuals. War of Independence, Civil War, anti-slavery, anti-prohibition, coloured rights, anti-Vietnam draft protests. All of these involved large groups of people who stood up and said "Boo sucks to the law", and we got a better society out of it.
Re:I agree completely (Score:5, Insightful)
Civil disobedience would be to copy your DVD's and store them in a safe space as backups.
Civil disobedience would be to use Microsoft Office on your laptop and desktop.
In other words, civil disobedience is doing things that might be illegal but still carry the full force of morality. Your acts are both illegal and immoral.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
big difference.
Copyright infringement is NOT theft (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes it is a crime or at least a civil violation (tort). It may or may not be immoral - but it is NOT THEFT. Calling it theft does not make it so.
Theft involves obtaining something, and taking it away from someone else - not illegally using, making or distributing a copy.
Re:Copyright infringement is NOT theft (Score:2)
Well, since we're talking about chillingeffects.org [chillingeffects.org], it seems appropriate to quote their FAQ:
...and it goes on from there. But it looks pretty clear to me that these legal experts suggest that copyright infringement steals at least the right of reproduction, if not the right to distribution as well. So you may not like the word theft, but I think it was fine for the original post to use that term.
Re:Copyright infringement is NOT theft (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't buy it. Then we could call murder "theft" as well, on the grounds that you've just "stolen" my right to life. Or why not call "driving while under the influence" "stealing", after all you've "stolen" my right to travel public roads in relative safety. No, IMHO that doesn't work.
And no, I don't buy into the usage in many cases of "theft of service" either. I think most speakers of English takes "theft" to mean that you deprive someone of something, as in they cannot use said thing any more. And that's not the case here. You can still copy all you want, or broadcast your cable TV or whatever. Nothing's been "stolen" in this case.
It's still a crime, but it's another crime.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
wrong.
acts of civil disobedience are often illegal FOR a moral purpose.
Blocking traffic is illegal, the reason your doing so may be moral, but the act(sitting in traffic)is illegal, but seldom why your protesting.
The more injust the law, the more extreme we must go to get attention to the law.
"playing within the rules" and waiting to do something the "right way" is ont the only solution.
If you where on a plane, and some bozo pulls a knife would you:
go to the back of the plane and wait quietly because "its the way its done", or would you try and kick his ass?
they are changing the rules on us, and if we keep playing by them they will when.
Is the time here to start doing what this guy is doing? I don't think so, but if something isn't done soon, it will be the next step we will have to take to raise awareness.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
You're nuts.. (Score:2)
Civil disobedience would be to use Microsoft Office on your laptop and desktop.
How is this different from copying DVDs? In both cases you're depriving the corporation of potential additional sales, which is what you consider to be theft.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
The instigators of the American revolution were common (pun intented) traitors.
The civil war tramped all over property rights and turned brother against brother.
Speakeasies were both illegal and immoral.
Coloured rights protestors were thugs and vandals.
Anti-Vietnam draft dodgers were... well, insert your own pejorative term from the period. Cowardly traitors?
The single lesson: society changes. Morality changes. Legality changes. Most protestors are technically wrong when they start out, and are only viewed as having the moral high ground when they win and write the history books.
Every time those in power no longer agree with the populace, civil disobedience or armed insurrection follows. Read some history.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
No, civil disobedience does not involve acting immorally. Your examples are very poorly chosen for a variety of reasons.
Morality does not change; perceptions of morality change. And if you are suggesting mine and others perceptions of morality on this issue need to change, you need to be more specific what it is that needs to change.
Re:I agree completely (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you do it publicly and openly? Or do you hide behind nicknames when you do it? If you're doing it while attempting to remain free of repercussions, that's not civil disobedience, it's simply petty theft. Civil disobedience is standing up and saying, "I believe this is wrong, and I'm not going to obey it. You'll have to keep arresting me until the law is changed." What you claim to do is a disgrace to all those who practice true civil disobedience.
But that's okay, I realize now that you're a troll. Trolling to one story a day is one thing, but right after replying to you in the multi-player game thread I see this post, and it made me check your posting history. Something I recommend everyone do before any significant replies.
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
History by Mel Gibson. Actual history is replete with examples of those who contributed to civil disobedience anonymously, and gave moral support to those who were prepared to stand up and take the big risks.
Declining to pay taxes to the British crown during the American revolution was common theft at the time, right? I'm not sure how that's significantly different from someone refusing to pay the Movie Tax, a significant part of which goes to "royalty", e.g. movie stars, producers, and bought policians, most of whom are thoroughly corrupt in every moral and legal sense.
I'm not suggesting that we should celebrate the anoymously disobedient, just that we shouldn't flame them.
Incidentally, what's your contribution?
Waiting for the inevitable (Score:2, Funny)
Shocking! (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, those lawsuits hurt me a lot too when they're not grounded - They build up lots of static.
How about groundless?
Re:Shocking! (Score:2)
Re:Shocking! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Shocking! (Score:4, Funny)
Looks like ... (Score:3, Funny)
It's Nice To See (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this that much different from submitting a patch to a peer-maintenance group and having it reviewed by various persons of various qualifications? Or from submitting an Ask Slashdot, for that matter.
I've been involved with businesses that have been threatened by letters about various things. Upon receiving the first of those letters, I started expanding my knowledge of legalese, law application, etc. A lot of google and a few dead trees later, and I'm much more informed... and can now spot the bullshit much easier than I once could.
This database should provide a short circuit, so that people can quickly learn about things that pertain to them, and get assistance on resolving them.
I think this sort of idea is important to free speech in an increasingly corporate medium. It's heartening to see that people care enough to actually devote their time to it.
-l
Almost as bad (Score:2, Funny)
put where your mouth is your money (Score:5, Insightful)
/. readers have had another prequel to this with the attack of Barney [slashdot.org], the purple Tyrannosaurus rex.
Anyone have experience with brandimensions.com? (Score:4, Interesting)
Their tag line: "monitoring and protecting your brand equity."
Check the connotations of the individual words:
Again, I may be [and probably am] wrong.
Re:Anyone have experience with brandimensions.com? (Score:2, Interesting)
Fortunately, at least now, they can't keep the news of their actions localized. Now let's just hope people pay some attention.
And with that name, they're easily confused with a laxative company--Bran Dimensions. Of course, now I'll probably be named in a lawsuit.
Argh (Score:1, Offtopic)
For Senders Too?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Along that line of thinking: How long do you think it will be before C&D letters contain language specifying that you cannot publish them? (And even if you say that is not possible/legal/whatever, how many will try anyway?)
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:2, Informative)
Copyright (Score:2)
But as a defense, you could argue that publishing these threats with analysis are of public importance.
Can't publish the letter? (Score:2)
Unless the sender and recipient are under NDA, this would be laughed so far out of court it would land in the ocean. And not just in the Ninth Circuit.
Of course, some unscrupulous shark might push Congress for a law saying C&D letters are confidential, but I can't imagine that passing 1st amendment scrutiny.
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:2)
Dear Evil Empire,
After extensive research, I discovered that your website contains a reference to "Widgetmitalls" on its third page. Please note that all discussion of Widgetmitalls are to be considered a trade secret on the grounds that Widgetmitalls form the foundation for my business / religious movement. Please remove all references to Widgetmitalls, or replace them with the more generic "Widget".
Sincerely,
The Little Guy
I could then run that through this database and have people comment on it. That will allow me to improve on it, so that by the time it actually reaches Evil Empire Incorporated, it looks ominous enough that they might pay it heed.
I assume, at any rate, that that is what the functionality exists for. Quite subversive.
-l
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:2)
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:3, Interesting)
As for the legality of publishing the letters...IANAL, but as others have said here, and as far as I've ever heard, unless you have entered into a non-disclosure or confidentiality agreement with the party sending you a C&D letter, you are free to show that letter to anyone you please. It doesn't matter if the letter says "This letter is confidential and cannot be shared with third parties." You have made no such agreement with the sender, so you cannot be bound by any "terms" in that letter. Until you do enter into such an agreement or are ordered by a court of law to keep such correspondence confidential, AFAIK, you are free to share it with whomever you wish.
I've actually seen C&D letters with similar phrasing before. It's just more BS to try and scare people into capitulating without a fight.
DennyK
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:2)
The point is that it's as meaningful as "by reading this letter you agree to do XYZ". Youc annot unilaterally force what amounts to a contractual obligation.
About they only way which it might be possible would be to attempt to use something like the DMCA to do this. But the last thing they'd want would be a judge striking that kind of usage down and then looking very closely at the rest of the statute.
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:2)
Dear Sirs or Madams:
I recently received a communication from you and/or your organization or business regarding some matter. As is my usual procedure for all email and paper mail, I have performed initial machine scan. This machine scan reported with high confidence ranking that this communication fell under one or more of the following categories:
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:2)
Who's right here?
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:2)
Ok (Score:2)
What about posting a letter for the purpose of receiving legal advice? Wouldn't that have to be allowed? Are they going to say you can't show it to your attorney? You can't show it to non-attorneys? You can't post it on a bulletin board with a note attached asking if anyone can advise you on a course of action? You can't post it on a website with your own comments attached and a request for legal advice? Where would the line be drawn, and why?
Re:Ok (Score:2)
Of course, there is the whole fair use defense where it's OK to infringe.
Re:For Senders Too?! (Score:2)
Except that such a C&D letter is a business letter. Does this make no difference?
Good idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Good idea (Score:1)
Re:Good idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Good idea (Score:2)
Re:Good idea (Score:2)
More the lawyer's office than the court room.
A C&D letter does not actually imply that the person sending it has any legal case; it simply means they took the time to try to intimidate you into believing they do.
Also to convince them that they have no way to defend themselves in an actual court, Let alone the possibility to counter sue the plaintiff.
Re:Good idea (Score:2)
The way things are going that will soon be the entire planet anyway. The US is quite happy to try and impose US law on Canadians, hassle people in Europe and abduct a group of people from Asia.US citizens are also bound by US law wherever they might be.
You also have various things such as the WIPO treaty and ideas of "globalisation" and "harmonisation" of laws. (When it comes to copyright laws the typical result appears to be more to put some of the worst bits of various copyright laws together. From the customer and quite often the actual producer POV more a "disharmonisation".)
you've come a long way, slashdot... (Score:2, Interesting)
It's kind of funny how the relationship between technology and the law have changed. Four years ago, who would have expected to see an archive of legalisms as a /. front-page story? I mean, this is a tech news site, right?
Ah well, at least there are still white hat lawyers on our side, for the moment at least.
How many C&D are written by amateurs? (Score:2, Interesting)
Assuming you got one, and I'm pretty sure I know someone who did, if they aren't signed by a member of a state bar or plaing fantasy, any recourse, other than telling them where to shove it?
Examples may include, "Dear Sir/Madam, our attorney has advised us that what you are doing violates etc etc etc...", which, IMHO is hardly a C&D rather wishful thinking.
/.'d (Score:5, Informative)
I wonder if EFF et al will be sending /. a Cease & Desist letter for a premeditated DOS attack on their web server? :)
This is great news! (Score:1)
The legal analysis is a bonus.
Now, I wonder how long it will be before chillingeffects.org itself receives a C&D demanding that it remove someone's "confidential" C&D letter they sent, after realizing the whole world will see what their legal thugs have done.
Cease and Desist (Score:3, Funny)
It has come to our attention that you maintain a web site operating under the moniker "chillingeffects.org" and through that service are engaged in the provision of legal services.
Since you are not licensed to provide legal services, we respectfully ask that you cease and desist from providing such services.
Respectfully yours,
Joe Q. Lawyer and associates.
Re:Cease and Desist Unauthorized Law Practice? (Score:4, Interesting)
That being said, I wholeheartedly wish this site the best: a little knowledge about the law can go a long way in shielding oneself from abusive practices. I'm pleasantly surprised, also, to see that /.ers are not flaming the hell out of the idea, given the prevailing "why should I need a professional to explain my legal rights to me - life is supposed be simple, obvious and unfailingly fair" world view often expressed here.
Re:Cease and Desist Unauthorized Law Practice? (Score:4, Informative)
It'll probably get whacked down by the big boys if it becomes a nuisance. I remember reading a while back about the law firms for some big industry types getting some law passed to prohibit law students from helping low-income families deal with legal paperwork and filings in order to save their homes from being destroyed to make way for factories and industrial plants. The students were making it too easy for the families to fight the big companies, so they just got the practice outlawed. Suddenly the resistance dropped dramatically and they could move in a their leisure.
Re:Cease and Desist Unauthorized Law Practice? (Score:2)
Re:Cease and Desist Unauthorized Law Practice? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Cease and Desist Unauthorized Law Practice? (Score:2)
I agree that anyone who thinks they are my client because I post something on the Internet is probably a "butthead." But I'm not sure all courts would agree, particularly because the context of /. is that one person states a position, and then others reply to it. Unlike generalized internet posting (e.g., on my own web site, addressed to no one in particular), I can't see that a "reply" to a particular individual's comment is categorically different from other informal discussions where atty-client relationships have been found. So I don't feel insulated from "buttheads" without the disclaimer, and we all know there are lots of "buttheads" around. (Maintaining strict anonymity and declining to post any email address, even an anonymous one, increases my comfort level also. If someone really wanted to consult me as their attorney based on what I've said on /., how would they ever find me? Even the "reasonable butthead person" probably wouldn't be justified in assuming they have an attorney-client relationship with an anonymous, unreachable creature known only as "raresilk.")
Although I don't know of cases where individuals have sued an attorney based on legal advice posted on a web site, I am aware that many state bar organizations are cracking down on what they view as unauthorized practice of law over the internet. Again, I see nothing about posting to a web site that makes it categorically different from other printed legal materials, all of which must conform with applicable state law rules on admission to practice. Although I make specific disclaimers in my posts where appropriate (e.g., I haven't read the court's opinion yet, I'm most familiar with California law, I'm not an expert in trade mark law, you should consult your own lawyer before making any important business decisions, blah, blah), I feel more comfortable with a general disclaimer that plainly indicates I do not intend to practice law or give legal advice anywhere I'm not authorized to practice.
site is under the slashdot-effect... (Score:1)
ceased and desisted (Score:1)
ah! (Score:3, Insightful)
Cease and desist gets Cease and desisted (Score:2)
Great timing (Score:3, Interesting)
Now as soon as the Slashdot effect fades, I can use the site.
Copyright question (Score:3, Interesting)
In Germany, there is something similar to C&D letters ("Abmahnung", slightly worse because you must pay a few hunderd dollers, or they'll go to court).
There is a database about it, but you must never quote the Abmahnung on a website - you'd get another one for copyright infringment.
Read Groucho's Rejoinder (Score:3, Funny)
Don't try this at home kids: apparently even Groucho's humor was lost on those dour lawyers.
BTW, does anyone know which Marx Brothers movie has something like the following exchange?
Nice but.. (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a great introduction to those who aren't familiar with the difference between copyright and trademark, for example. It'd be nice to have some actual annotations by lawyers. A good site with this kind of content is Consumer Affairs [consumeraffairs.com]. They have Real Live Lawyers who read consumer complaints and give their opinion on who's at fault, what the relevant laws are, etc. I'd love to see one of these C&D letters ripped apart by a lawyer, e.g. 'this is clearly a parody that falls under fair use.'
Day of Defeat game and chilling emails (Score:3, Interesting)
So what she's basically saying is, she wants us to make the players of our game stop using any kind of military insignia/unit name in their online names. She's also been emailing various DoD "clans" asking the same thing. As you might expect of flame ready teens, some have started bombarding her with some pretty interesting (as I'm guessing) responses.
Now she's writing to us (the DoD Team) and Sierra (who we have ZERO connection with) asking us to make them stop emailing her.
Sheesh!
So - thank GOD for that website. I feel like we're not alone anymore after having it to read!
Cease & Desist WE NEED MORE OF THEM (Score:3, Funny)
My Cease & Desist
Dear Sir,
My penis is already too long, and I already know everything about my neigbor and don't need a net detective. I am already married so I don't care about finding a perfect mate, and my mathematical skills make it extremely unlikely that I will visit your on-line casino. I don't need your on-line porno, or your Nigierian.
Your repeated attempts to market to me are it harassament. If you were doing this over a phone I would already be seeing your sorry but in jail. Since you are hiding I must send this to everyone that has helped you in your endeavour.
Please remit 1,000 dollars to my swiss bank account or I'll sick my laywer on you.
Sincerely
Penis is to large and doesn't need to add another inch.
I imagine this site is here to stay. (Score:3)
what type of law does it cover? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Off topic but is there a site like this for NDA (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Equivalent sites for other countries than US? (Score:2)
Remember many of the corporations in question are truely global. Though some of them have different trading or simply well known names in different parts of the world. It's more common in the US because they have more experience of using US laws and quite probabaly at manipulating them there.
The domination of the Democrat and Republican parties in the US at all levels of government makes things easier. In many European countries you find not only a more diverse range of political parties, but also differances between national, regional and local government.