Multiple C&Ds?! You make me realize I might not be living the adventure I should be.

Before we sold our fintech SaaS startup in 2015, we received a C&D from Dealogic and I thought, wow, we've made it into the big leagues! My adrenaline wore off pretty quickly though, because after our attorney sent them a defiant letter warning their London law firm to not mess with a Texas LLC, we never heard from them again. We were flying below the radar, so we just surmised some Dealogic customer had showed a Dealogic sales rep our product, and they probably carpet bomb anytime they see anyone playing anywhere near their entrenched & wildly expensive product.

Never heard about Dealogic so I just Googled -- the title of the click says:

> Dealogic: A trusted partner to top financial firms worldwide

Oh well, I probably don't need to dig deeper to know what it does then.

At the risk of sounding very dumb — what were you able to determine from that? I have no idea what it means, almost sounds like the mafia

Edit: their about page sounds even more mafia-esque. “Dealogic connects banks and investors in the only truly global network… Firms who use Dealogic see results in increased profitability and productivity… Whether you want to analyze wallet share, execute a deal, align operating units, manage risk, or comply with regulation, there is only one answer.”

> what were you able to determine from that

I interpret this as: a company that is successful not because it provides a service that is useful or good, but one that other companies - in this case "financial firms" - are FORCED to buy, usually through compliance or regulatory means.

Think of it like an auto insurance company advertising themselves as "your trusted partner on the roads." Yeah I guess, but it's still meaningless.

I'm not as familiar with the compliance part of their solution, so there could be some of what you're talking about. I don't think their software is totally useless, just possibly, um, over-priced, and needing competitors. :)

Our lightweight SaaS was focused on analytics related to share of wallet and return on capital and improving insights into client relationships. With our tool, an investment banker could perform some tasks in seconds or minutes that normally an MD expected a junior analyst to do in hours or days. Not rocket science, but useful. And not as expensive as Dealogic. I wish I could say our creation was taking the world by storm, but we haven't been involved for many years and as so often happens with acquisitions, they didn't really execute well on our original target audience and took it in another direction.

So yes, like the mafia.

I increasingly see less distinction between the various forms of economic rent and organised crime.

The answer is to have Dealogic give them an offer they cannot refuse?

It's sounds like the EPIC pitch in the EHR sector.

EPIC - because everyone else is using it, and boy it sure is hard for our large company to share data with a competitor's product, be a shame if a patient suffered because of it.

But at least it's only in one market, which meant the Feds could step in. https://www.healthit.gov/topic/information-blocking

The shortest, and wildly simplified answer based on my few years of using it, is that Dealogic is basically a humungous database of financial information, often unavailable anywhere else. It's also complex as hell and even pricier, and has an interface reminiscing of the best Win 3.11 times. Cool stuff, from industry user perspective.

They're usually more boring than you might realize. For example, if your new business's trademark is similar to an established company's.

Yes. Most of the C&Ds I've received have been mundane. My favorite one was over a set of game rules that I wrote that were very vaguely similar to a board game that was on the market.

That one was so ridiculous that I didn't consult my attorney at all about it. I just told the company to sue me. I never heard from them again.

Mine was where a customer who had signed a contract with ${company} to make and distribute an app, sent a C&D to stop distributing the app.

Not even sure how that happened. New lawyer? Lost paperwork?

Yeah, we received one about having t-shirts that said "network ninja" for instance. We held a small party that afternoon celebrating that someone actually noticed our marketing.

I think I've just been doing this for a long time.

Over the years, I've collected quite a few C&Ds from various projects:

- Google for creating a mention tracker I was distributing as a mac dashboard widget

- Netflix for creating a DVD barcode to Netflix queue ios app (they were trying to to antagonize their retail partners too much at the time apparently)

- Microsoft for abusing some of their early text to speech DLL's for a really crappy RSS to Audio "podcast" app (they were meant for server side telephony apps)

- LinkedIn + Salesforce for linking their data with a Chrome extension

- Hubspot for mentioning their Inbound conference and saying that my software worked with theirs

Thinking back now these are all quite old, I don't know if the companies have become more lenient or I've become more cautious.

Shame, those all sound incredibly useful.

They didn’t say they ceased and or desisted!

What's the proper course of action if you don't have an attorney?

I'm going to avoid the snarky "hire an attorney" answer but once you get past that necessary first step I do have a few tips:

    * get comfortable reading legal documents, this will allow you to have more
      intelligent conversations with your attorney
    * don't let your attorney make your business decisions, one of their jobs is to
      point out risks, one of your jobs (owner/ceo/leadership) is to figure out how
      to mitigate risk but that is not the same thing as avoiding all risks
    * learn to draft legalese, it will help minimize your attorney's billable hours

Okay, since you failed to avoid the snarky "hire an attorney" thing, I'm going to ask: how much would it reasonably cost to hire an attorney for advice on this? Assuming the contacting lawyer is on shaky ground. No "it depends" please, a ballpark.

Maybe it's cheaper to have one on retainer. How much per month, if like a normal citizen your only daily legal risks are random megacorporations threatening you?

Should everyone in the US have a lawyer on call? Should we consider it a normal tax for being a member of the US legal system? An insurance everyone signs up for like drivers insurance and life insurance? Is this only a concern for software developers?

My attorney charges me about $200/hr. Most things I talk to him about require less than an hour of billable time.

Also, I've been working with him for so long (including on a few nontrivial things like selling companies) that he often doesn't charge me at all for trivial things.

That is well-below current market rates in decent-size cities.

I think in most Western countries, "low triple digits" is a good ballpark estimate for "advice" - i.e. a "holy shit this is like a month's worth of living cost" amount if you're a poor student, or completely negligible if you work in a highly paying job.

You might even get an initial consult for free. You may also be entitled to a free consultation via an insurance, including collective insurances or assistance programs offered through your employer or associations that you're a member of.

> Should everyone in the US have a lawyer on call?

I had a coworker at a previous job who often talked about "her family's attorney." I'm like, families have attorneys? I don't think I've talked to a lawyer once in my life.

I always feel like there's a whole rule-book of "how to Do Life" that I didn't get, for this easing-into-the-upper-middle-class and/or doing-serious-business-stuff shit, that other people just know, because of who their families are and who they grew up hanging out with.

I gather the version of that I did get was the middle-class version—which some others didn't get and have a similar "wait, that's just normal?" reaction as I do to the upper-middle stuff. Like 90% of that's basically credit-related—how credit cards work and how to use them, how to build credit, how to buy a house (generally with a mortgage, so, still basically a credit-related thing), that kind of stuff.

I've noticed similar things when it comes to paying others to do stuff for me. Having a house cleaner come in for the first time was fucking weird. Still is, really. I can't relax, feel like I ought to be helping. Or paying someone to do work on my house that I could do—tiling, drywalling, some light electrical, plumbing, most general home-improvement stuff. It feels gross—I don't think it does for those who grew up with that stuff being normal. I suspect it's a barrier to advancing in business, because those attitudes carry over. Delegation is weird to me. Being someone's boss is horribly uncomfortable. The notion of starting a business and hiring employees to take over stuff I've been doing feels icky and wrong, and no amount of one part of my brain telling another part to knock it off makes that go away.

Yep I'm with you, I am absolutely loathe to hire anyone to do something I could do myself. I've done major home repairs, painting, flooring, kitchen and bath remodels, I do almost all my own auto repairs and maintenance, I do my own laundry, I clean my own house, I cut my own grass. I have neighbors who just pay for someone to do all that without a second thought.

There are certain tasks that you would never do yourself, such as surgery. And there are certain tasks like changing your oil where anyone with patience and diligence can do it themselves. It's just a question of whether you want to spend the time to learn it and do it.

Responding to a C&D letter from a Fortune 50 company, I would posit, is more like performing surgery than changing your oil. The cost of being wrong is rather high.

Right, that's the "I could do myself" part.

Though I've generally been disappointed with the legal services I've hired. Law and medicine seems like most professions, there are some really good practitioners and a lot who are mediocre but have passed the minimum required qualifications, and it's hard for an outsider to immediately spot the difference.

Speaking of surgery, here's an analogy that might be helpful.

Five years ago I had a catastrophic ankle injury I suffered while running in Moab. Two broken bones, lots of torn ligaments, and otherwise irreparable damage without serious surgery.

I interviewed a whole bunch of surgeons before I decided where to go under the knife. And I don't remember where I got the advice, but someone told me the most important question to ask is: "How many times have you performed this specific surgery (a Maisonneuve fracture repair)?"

I eventually found the Steadman clinic and a doctor who had already performed the exact surgery I needed nearly 100 times. Everyone else's answer was less than 5. Some even answered 0. The surgical clinic I used had signed pictures of professional athletes all over the wall. I found the true specialist, and I'm very thankful that I did.

Even bad lawyers and surgeons are expensive. When you have a bet-the-business legal issue, do plenty of advanced interviewing to make sure that the one you hire has plenty of experience with the exact issue you need help with. If it's not obvious that you've found the right person, keep looking.

> Law and medicine seems like most professions, there are some really good practitioners and a lot who are mediocre

This is accurate, in my experience. It's what makes initially finding a lawyer (or doctor, or therapist, or auto mechanic, or etc.) a painful experience. You have to expect to go through a few before you find one that works for you.

Then, when you find one, treasure them for the pearls that they are.

The weird bit is when doing it yourself turns out to be more of a hassle and more expensive than paying someone else to do it. Around 15 years ago I decided to learn how to change my own oil. Even after excluding the fixed costs (I bought little ramp things to drive the front of the car up on while I worked underneath, and a container to drain the old oil into), I was surprised at the per-change costs: the cost of the oil itself (and the new filter), as well as the cost to properly dispose of the old oil. Ended up being more expensive than just taking the car to Jiffy Lube and leaving it with them for an hour or so.

That was the first and last time I ever changed my own oil.

Feel ya. Disposal is a pain, and if you mess up, it's a trip to home Depot to get some chemicals to clean your asphalt. That was fun when my apartment had me parking in a shared garage...

Oil is simple and easy enough that I just get it changed with my inspections. There are things that, even if you're competent enough to monitor and do yourself, is still better getting a second pair of eyes on. That said I wouldn't do jiffy lube or other stop and go oil shops... Too many noobs there where the chance of them effing it up is higher than myself. I once had a tire buldge when I was younger and broke AF, they replaced the wrong tire and I had to drive back to convince them they changed the wrong one (big old bubble in the sidewall), took a bit to convince them they changed the wrong one since they refused to admit fault. Thank God I took a picture before that was clear enough to place the bulb right on the text in the exact same spot.

I'm having similar concerns around my diy for some electrical and gas work. Yeah technically I can do it myself to code, but I'd rather inspect someone else's work and not deal with the liability of fucking it up myself. Just because I can do it doesn't mean I can do it to the level of a quality professional, and I'm now wealthy enough to actually get the pros and not just the journeymen. There's something about paying for quality work that just feels good. So long as you can respect the labor, it feels great and not so weird to hire others.

That said, I've had a few coding projects I've subcontracted in my home due to lack of time to those on roughly equal grounds as myself. It feels a bit weird, especially for tasks with unknown bounds but worth it for the time and schedule savings. I'd rather not wait another 6 months and spend my personal time when I have a laid off friend who just wants some bar cash.

As long as Jiffy Lube doesn’t put the new oil in the radiator.

Sometimes you do things yourself because that’s the only person you trust.

But oil changes are one of those “do it yourself once so you understand it and then let Walmart do it” kind of things.

I've had shops do all of the following (not at the same time but each has happened before I stopped letting them change my oil):

  - fill with the wrong weight oil
  - not change the filter
  - not tighten the new filter adequately, resulting in leaks
  - install a very low quality "no-name" filter
  - overfill the oil
  - overtighten/strip threads on the drain plug.
  - leave tools under the hood.

And that's just oil changes, one of the simplest things a shop can do. Maybe it's because they put their least skilled people on it, but it doesn't incline me to trust them for anything else.

> Having a house cleaner come in for the first time was fucking weird. Still is, really. I can't relax, feel like I ought to be helping.

A long time ago, I had a house cleaner come in once per week to do deep cleaning stuff. It was quite a luxury! However, I always spent a couple of hours cleaning the house in preparation for their arrival.

What I've noticed is a shift with age and wealth. When I was young and poor, I had time and energy in abundance and never hired people to do anything for me (excepting for specialized things like medical care). Now that I'm old and more comfortable, I don't have any issue hiring people to do things I can technically do myself.

I look at it this way: whether you hire someone or DIY it, you're paying something to get it done. If not money, then time and effort. I just pay in the manner that, big picture, costs me the least. When young and poor, my time and effort was worth less than actual money. Now, money is often worth less than my time and effort.

Is it worth paying $50 to have the neighborhood kid mow my lawn for me? Younger me would say absolutely not. Current me says absolutely.

I would guess later in life when your insurance agent or tax prep person find out you didn't fill out a will yet and introduces you or encourages you to have an attorney write one with you. Now your family has an attorney! That or going through a family estate.

A coworker's wife's friend is an attorney. So he's "his family's attorney" now, because of course he is. My landlord is a dentist, so he's my dentist now, because of course he is... That's how it mostly works... I guess :P

The only time I've ever needed a lawyer was for a small side business I had at the time. One of our customers had an unpaid invoice that was past 90 days, and they were not responding to phone calls. Happily, my business partner's brother was a lawyer and she asked him to send out a dunning letter. We had the money within days :-)

Yea, they're a useful bunch, especially if you know one. Back when I worked for an e-commerce site, we were deciding if we're gonna implement package splitting CoD (cash on delivery) for multi-package orders, or if we're gonna just slap the entire sum on the first package (this seems like an easy enough job, but when you have many shipping service APIs you have to work with and you have automated CoD back-reporting that goes into your invoicing, it becomes annoying). We did the easier thing and just sent a pre-drafted dunning letter to people who took the CoD-less packages for free and did not pay for the first one with CoD. Worked like a charm.

> she asked him to send out a dunning letter

Honestly, I think that about 1/3 of the value I get from my lawyer is the power of his letterhead.

The rest is explaining contracts to me, explaining risks and exposures of things I'm planning to do or that have been done to me, educating me about aspects of law I need to know on a daily basis, and such.

A tiny percentage is helping with large things like selling my business, negotiating major contracts, defending me against legal attacks, and that sort of thing.

Most smaller firms will require a retainer. $5k is fairly common. I've been able to work with several large firms for work, and several smaller firms for personal stuff.

Personally, I much prefer the larger firms. In general their work product, responsiveness, and timeliness is well ahead of small firms. They aren't even that much more expensive for some things. Unfortunately I don't know what the retainer $$ would be, if any, for a larger firm.

Sigh. 5k is three months rent for many people. It's not surprising that we don't see more bootstrapped startups from underprivileged people.

This might depend on where you are. In my area, it's unusual to have to provide a retainer at all unless you're doing something big or the lawyer suspects you might have trouble paying your bill later.

In my personal experience with small firms closed ended matters like wills, contracts, or individual IP filings don't require a retainer.

Open ended matters, like probate, starting an IP portfolio, or response to a C&D trigger a retainer.

> bootstrapped startups from underprivileged people.

i dont think startups should be paying a retainer. You do this only after it's worth the money - ala, you either know your domain is a gray area and is definitely going to require a lawyer.

This has nothing to do with underprivileged people or not.

Depending on whose advice you value, Deviant Ollam has a video on YouTube entitled "Lawyer, Passport, Locksmith, Gun"[1] where he makes the argument that yeah, you probably should have a lawyer as part of a broader personal risk-reduction strategy.

(I understand folk might take particular issue with that last as part of "risk reduction", but I hope that doesn't detract from the earlier parts of the strategy)

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ihrGNGesfI

if your risk reduction strategy entails a gun and a passport, you probabably don't need a lawyer who will tell you not to use either to deal with your legal risks.

Q: is the locksmith for you getting into other people's stuff, or keeping people out of your stuff? Wondering if we're going for a trifecta here.

The entire theme of the video is that normal people can find themselves in relatively normal, foreseeable situations where you really need one (or more) of these things right now, and trying to access them in an emergency without prior planning/prep is less likely to be successful.

The reason why "it depends" is so often the answer is because legal questions are very situational and fact-specific. You'd need to consult with a lawyer on your specific situation to get an answer.

But, generally speaking, a quick consult and having a lawyer write a response letter is a few hundred dollars. Let's ballpark it as $300-1000, depending on the nature of the case. Now, that's assuming that the company that sent you the C&D doesn't sue you. If they sue you and you go to court, the lawyer fees go up quite a bit and become pretty much impossible to ballpark (though I'm sure someone has tried).

Having a lawyer on retainer isn't really necessary. It might be something you do if you're a business that doesn't have a lawyer on staff, but you want access to a lawyer's time when you need it. For most regular folks, I can't imagine setting up a retainer until you need to engage a lawyer for a case and want to guarantee their time.

As the (non lawyer) who fell into managing all US legal firm interactions for my day job, I support this list.

If you are comfortable with legal documents; have a law dictionary to understand what specific language means; and read historical case law on the topic in question, you will be well prepared to have a seat at the table with your attorneys.

> read historical case law on the topic in question

Is this even at all accessible to anyone who isn't already in a major law firm? I'm assuming it requires some sort of thousand-dollar subscription to an exploitative publishing house?

You just need a law library nearby. Most moderate-sized cities have them.

If not, call the city or county clerk and ask, they often have access at the courthouse to PACER and friends.

Any big case you want to read about, and many more, will be on RECAP (pacer backwards).

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/

Put it in your deepweb toolbox.

You can also get some free credit every quarter on PACER. With the recap extension, you can contribute that to RECAP automagically.

> I'm assuming it requires some sort of thousand-dollar subscription to an exploitative publishing house?

Assuming you are in the US, all case law is public domain (although documents used in cases aren't)

https://guides.loc.gov/case-law/databases-online-resources

I often need legal support for things (CFAA threat every few years and litigation for FOIA work), and this list matches my experiences. A lot of the work is just building a relationship with an attorney or firm you can trust.

I appreciate that. As someone with a hobby making software, I can see the need for hiring at some point but I don't even know where to start. Do you just look up one online and call and say "I got a nasty letter, will you be my attorney"? Is there some kind of ongoing subscription cost to keep being "my attorney" or just pay per hour when you have an issue?

I’d start by asking people around you if they know an attorney. Recommendations from people you know will almost always be more valuable than a Google search.

If you don’t know anyone that would be in the area of law that you’re looking for, ask for _any_ attorney recommendations, then ask those attorneys for recommendations for people in the area of law you need.

If you absolutely cannot find a lawyer through people you know (and, really, try asking people), then you can look up a lawyer referral service for your state. Most state or county bars will have some program for making referrals to lawyers. Often these will have a low-ish flat fee, which will get your a short initial consultation with a few lawyers in the relevant area of law.

For billing, it’s something to ask your lawyer, thought most lawyers will have some kind of billing program where you pay hourly for what you use, and don’t need to pay some ongoing fee just to have the lawyer as “your lawyer”. Small business that only need a lawyer for a few hours a couple times a year aren’t uncommon clients for business lawyers.

The problem with this advice is that this is a very niche area of law. Unless the people you know have had prior experiences with data-access/web-scraping legal issues, a generalist recommendation is very unlikely to be helpful here.

> If you don’t know anyone that would be in the area of law that you’re looking for, ask for _any_ attorney recommendations, then ask those attorneys for recommendations for people in the area of law you need.

Attorneys know attorneys. I’d still recommend starting with your network, then asking those attorneys who they would recommend for the services you need. Or ask them if they know anyone that might be able to refer you.

There are probably two dozen specialists on this issue nationwide. A properly targeted Google search will outperform your personal network of attorneys (and their network of attorneys) 99.9% of the time.

Your assertion is that there are <= 24 lawyers, in the entire United States, that are qualified to handle a hobbyist software developer receiving a C&D?

I’m sorry, that just doesn’t sound at all credible to me.

It almost cannot be accurate by definition. There is no legal service that a hobbyist could _ever_ afford if there are <= 24 qualified specialists in the United States.

For small, transactional dealings where the amount of work is easy to predict, there may just be a fixed fee for that.

For more open-ended work, it is often billed by the hour (time and expense). If the work is non-trivial, they may ask for a retainer, which is a down payment against future hourly work and expenses incurred by the firm.

Another common billing model, called contingency, is generally reserved for cases where the firm is optimistic they will be able to receive a significant monetary judgment or settlement, which they will take part of for their time and effort.

> I can see the need for hiring at some point but I don't even know where to start.

I have advice for this. Most attorneys, at least in my area, will sit down and talk with you at no charge. My advice is to take advantage of this before you have an actual issue that needs attention and talk with a few of them. Investigate them, talk to their clients if you can, ask about them with professional organizations, etc.

And then just use them for routine stuff every so often. Run contracts by them before you sign, etc. The idea is that you want to develop a relationship with them so that you and they know each other. Then, if something comes up where you really need an attorney, yours is already very familiar with you and what you're doing.

> Is there some kind of ongoing subscription cost to keep being "my attorney" or just pay per hour when you have an issue?

There is a concept of keeping an attorney "on retainer" -- which basically means prepaying for legal services. At a small scale, this isn't worth doing. Treat your attorney like your auto mechanic: keep a relationship going, go to them for your oil changes and other routine stuff, and pay by the hour. Then when you need important work done, they're primed and ready.

This is all good advice.

Getting connected to an attorney by someone you trust is the best path. Just picking one after googling is dangerous.

Expect to pay more than you expect to pay.

ETA: America is a "pay to play" country, and those payments are mediated by lawyers. What I mean is: enforcement of laws mostly happens via suing people, and you need to be able to pay an attorney to win that suit.

> * get comfortable reading legal documents, this will allow you to have more intelligent conversations with your attorney

Another tip. Hire an attorney who will teach you how to do this effectively. A simple rule of thumb is to consult with an attorney when you don't understand something. A good attorney will walk you through the issue, explain the possible ramifications, and (most importantly!) show you the standard response(s). Next time you can do it yourself. Also, you'll ask more focused questions the next time a novel issue pops up on that topic. That also saves money.

In summary, think of your attorney as a mentor not a robot to provide legal advice.

I feel in particular your second point is similar to a security officer. Their job is to identify risk and propose the safest approach. But in extreme, the safest approach is to shutdown and do nothing - the only truly unbreakable system.

For any functioning system, ultimately a business owner will need to decide (formally and explicitly, or informally and implicitly) what risk they're willing to accept to proceed.

What you're saying I think is that you should be informed enough to have an intelligent conversation with your attorney, and be able to make decisions on what risk they point out you're willing to take, and/or how you can mitigate it without just avoiding/shutting down?

I once heard that a good attorney figures out how to do what you want to do, a poor one tells you what you can't do.

> don't let your attorney make your business decisions, one of their jobs is to point out risks, one of your jobs (owner/ceo/leadership) is to figure out how to mitigate risk but that is not the same thing as avoiding all risks

Man I wish the leadership team at the last startup I did understood that. They were too chickenshit to do anything their lawyer cautioned them against, and as a result we took no risks and got nowhere.

My main piece of advice is to get an attorney, preferably one who has experience in your industry.

They know more about how this stuff really works than you or I ever will, and you won't be able to judge what risk you're really taking without that knowledge.

But, if I were operating "without a net" like that (which I would never do!), and I really felt that the C&D was about something I wasn't doing wrong, I'd be inclined to ignore it. There's chance that you'll end up being sued, though, so you should be prepared for that possibility. That means you'll need an attorney anyway, and it will cost more than consulting one about a C&D to begin with.

> They know more about how this stuff really works

That's really the key. I used to work for a very small company that happened to have an attorney as one of the owners (there were a lot of cooks in that particular kitchen!). One day he came to me with a letter from a large RAM manufacturer demanding payment for a license on some technology I don't even remember. His only question was "do we use anything they make as far as you know?"

"Nope."

"OK. It's just a fishing expedition." Balls up the letter, throws in the trash and walks away.

If you eat the stationary that the C&D is printed on, it's like it never existed (IANAL).

You are entitled to sue to get a court to state that you have the legal right to do something. Probably overkill, but I bet it would get a surprised pikachu face from the C&D sending company.

Now whether it's a good idea to sue without an attorney, I have no idea. I genuinely don't.

> I am not a lawyer, but I've received several C&Ds for various things over the decades. The first one scared me to death.

The first time I got a letter for a trademark issue it seemed completely hostile and threatening. My lawyer said, basically, that it was no big deal and that they were in fact being pretty nice. We answered back and everything was resolved amicably. It actually turned out well because it made me realize we had not been paying enough attention and were unthinkingly referencing other brands instead of our own.

Multiple C&D recipient here as well which upon receiving the first, as some commenters have shared, I too may have needed an underwear change while reading the legal verbiage. However as with many things in life though once you get through the initial experience the latter experiences only get easier. My personal take is I must be doing something of value if other’s lawyers are writing me threatening letters. IANAL so YMMV

>once you get through the initial experience the latter experiences only get easier.

Just for clarification, do you mean soiling your underwear or dealing with a C&D?

You eventually get used to either, I suppose.

It's weird to me that big tech hasn't thought about offering a financial reward with C&D's.

"We will pay you $10000 if you C&D" seems like pennies to them, much less than the cost of legal fees, a nice amount of cash for a personal project that hasn't monetized yet.

Or a job

"We will give you a job offer to work on X if you C&D your own work on X"

also seems like a great strategy. If someone has already demonstrated enough talent to be a threat to your company, it seems like it would make full sense to try to hire them.

> Or a job. "We will give you a job offer to work on X if you C&D your own work on X

I'm honestly surprised this doesn't happen more in the gaming industry with companies buying big name mods and hiring the mod writers.

I know a lot of mod writers would probably be opposed because they actually just want to make free stuff, but some would probably launch careers off of it.

This exact situation happened with Roblox - they shut down then hired the biggest cheat developers for their game. Kinda funny.

Yeah, there are examples of it happening here and there. That's part of why I'm surprised it doesn't happen more. It seems like an easy avenue to hire talented and passionate people who want to work on your thing.

At the risk of violating some rules/conventions here about generated content, I put the question to GPT4 and got some rather reasonable answers. It's enough to convince me not to do that.

----

Offering payment to an individual or entity to cease an activity they should not be engaging in can introduce several disadvantages and potential legal complexities compared to a standard cease and desist letter. Here are some considerations:

- Precedent for Payment: Offering payment for the cessation of an infringing activity could set an unwanted precedent. It suggests that compliance with the law is negotiable and can be bought, potentially encouraging the same or other parties to infringe in the future with the expectation of receiving payment to stop.

- Admission of Weakness: Offering money might be interpreted as a sign that you are not confident in the legal strength of your claim. This could embolden the infringer or weaken your position in any subsequent legal proceedings.

- Contractual Obligation: If the other party accepts the offer, it creates a contractual agreement. If the infringer accepts the payment but continues the activity, or if there's a disagreement over whether the activity has ceased, you may have to engage in contract enforcement rather than straightforward infringement litigation, which could complicate matters.

- Tax and Financial Implications: The payment could have tax implications for both parties and might also affect the financial statements of a company if either party is a business.

- Mitigation of Harm: Paying the infringer doesn't address any harm that has already occurred. A cease and desist letter often includes demands for remedies or damages for past infringement, which would not typically be covered by a simple payment to stop the activity.

- Negotiation Power: Once you've put a monetary offer on the table, it can be difficult to withdraw or reduce that offer without weakening your negotiating position.

- Legal Interpretation: The offer of payment might be interpreted by the court as an acknowledgment that the infringed party is aware that their rights are not clear-cut or may even lack merit, thereby potentially undermining the legal basis for their claim.

- Public Perception: If the offer and its acceptance become public, it might be seen as a company or individual buying their way out of a legal dispute, which could affect public perception or brand reputation.

- Binding Effect: If the offer is accepted, the agreement may prevent you from pursuing legal action for any past infringement, depending on the terms of the agreement.

Good job and totally worth the fee. I'm not even kidding: with minimal effort you now have some things to consider and after that some now reasonably intelligent questions to bring to a real lawyer. You are much further ahead.

Do you have an ip defense insurance policy ?