7 ms·

When Sued Don't Tweet

130 points by bussetta 12y ago

throwaway9988 12y ago
I'm curious to when/if there are exceptions to this standard advice. When could it be a strategic move?
- danielrmay 12y ago
  When your lawyer tells you it is a strategic move.
  - josefresco 12y ago
    Agreed. Also it can help with this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_of_public_opinion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_of_public_opinion which can be a major factor in the outcome.
- arethuza 12y ago
  I can't think of any - I know that having been sued (OK it was my start-up, but I took it rather personally) and it was incredibly stressful and at the start I nearly replied to the other side with communications trying to naively "sort things out" that could have made things even worse. My stress levels decreased hugely when all communication was put into the hands of our lawyers - and it was eventually resolved with both sides walking away and paying their own expenses, which wasn't great as we had done nothing wrong but was probably the least worst option. Honestly - if someone raises a legal action against you - talk to a lawyer who specializes in the relevant area and do what they tell you, which is likely to include no public statement without their approval.
  - stingraycharles 12y ago
    Exactly. The desire for communication with the public is mostly based on emotion, not on a rational decision. Lawyers give you rational advice. Having been involved in a lawsuit last year, even after I won, I still don't dare to publicly talk about it for fear or repercussions. I simply ask myself: what do I have to gain, and what do I have to lose? Usually the risks and impact of the things I have to lose outweigh the things I have to gain, and it's a good way of making myself shut up.
- patio11 12y ago
  Approximately as frequently as when replacing John Carmack with a lawyer would improve your codebase.
- TomGullen 12y ago
  Perhaps if you can't afford a good lawyer to defend yourself so you have to attack the reputation of the sueing company hoping they will drop it from public pressure?
- 6cxs2hd6 12y ago
  For criminal matters, the short answer is, never. See Don't Talk to the Police. [1]. You want a defense attorney to handle this. For civil matters, although IANAL I think similar reasons apply, so similar answer: Don't Talk to the Public. If you're truly famous enough to need to break this rule, then you need an attorney who specializes in high-profile cases like this. Edit: By "cases like this", I mean an actor or athlete level of celebrity. Probably not John Carmack, despite how famous and awesome he may be within our circles. Really, the smartest thing is to just "shut up". Even though a false accusation is a genuine personal violation and you want to defend yourself, the best defense usually won't be DIY. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
- kubiiii 12y ago
  Maybe when your position largely depends on the public opinion and will be taken from you before you have a chance to have a trial. Maybe there is no pattern but elected officials, rock stars, often cry out their innocence when being accused of something, while having great lawyers.
buro9 12y ago
A possible exception: When you have no means to afford a lawyer and the case is obviously frivolous. Whilst I would nearly always go for shutting up, we've probably all witnessed the David being sued by a Goliath and their only viable action is to make it know and get support. That isn't what's happening here though... but no rule is black and white.
- danieltillett 12y ago
  Yes when you have nothing to lose you can afford to not worry about the legal niceties.
- nailer 12y ago
  Also: if you're a game developer, and Zenimax offers you a job, and you know this is how they treat people people who've moved on, you might consider taking a different role.
milliams 12y ago
Perhaps his lawyer okayed his tweets.
- sbarre 12y ago
  Then he should get a new lawyer
michaelq 12y ago
While that may help you in the courtroom, the court of public opinion doesn't wait for a verdict. It confuses silence with guilt. Acquittals are less likely to make front pages than acquittals.
- arrrg 12y ago
  Does the public care about this? I really don’t think so. This is a case about some boring legalities. I really can’t see it having any impact on how Carmack is viewed. There are probably many other situation in which that is not the case, but here I really can’t see anything bad happening as a consequence of Carmack not responding publicly.
  - prof_hobart 12y ago
    About this - possibly not. About other things that people, particularly celebs, are taken to court for - absolutely.
  - dnissley 12y ago
    What about gamers? They are their customers, and they can be a fickle bunch under the right circumstances. A recent example could be the reaction to the DRM in the latest sim city, and other games. A counterexample however could be EA, which most gamers loathe but continues to sell plenty of games. (Edit: Although now that I actually look it up EA is behind sim city. So who knows.)
    - arrrg 12y ago
      Gamers don’t care at all about people stealing IP. They don’t have a problem with it.
- danieltillett 12y ago
  This is true. Sometimes it is better to respond and risk losing in the legal court of tomorrow than stay silent and lose in the court of public opinion today.
- gvb 12y ago
devhinton 12y ago
Why is this up-voted? This is basically don't be a dumb-ass 101
smcl 12y ago
I'm confused - was the case of John Carmack cited because his tweets have now been raised in court and have hurt his case? I haven't been following this situation so I've zero context.
- Alphasite_ 12y ago
  It's only been a day to two since thise was public, I'm doubtful that they're being mentioned in court.
  - smcl 12y ago
    Ah so it's just general cautionary advice. I'd be interested to see if this comes up in court.
motters 12y ago
If someone makes a spurious allegation against you then I think you should defend yourself as much as possible, including via tweets or any other communication channels. Refuse to go quietly into the night.
- zavulon 12y ago
  Did you read the article? The point is you're making it worse by tweeting and making other public statements. You may win in court of public opinion, but you're making it easier for your opponent to beat you in actual court.
  - personZ 12y ago
    The blog post is pure speculation by what appears to be a layman. It has no more weight than any random comment on HN. It's worth stating that because people are treating it as if a famed IP lawyer has made a pronouncement of fact, when in actuality it's just someone giving, like, an opinion, man.
    - jacquesm 12y ago
      Let's see a famed IP lawyer that would disagree with the premise of the article. Attack the contents, if you can. There are several lawyers that I know of right here in this thread and I don't see anybody contradicting the advice.
      - personZ 12y ago
        Unnecessarily defensive. Was there something, anything, in my comment that is incorrect? Are you actually a contract/IP lawyer? Note that I'm not saying that you are wrong, because honestly I don't know. Because I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know all of the specifics of this case. But am I wrong in what I said about the authority of the post? This is why people preface things with IANAL. People often petition to the public (Tesla quite recently) in such cases -- regardless of pending lawsuits -- because the damage in perception can be larger than any possible legal damage. And stating simple facts of truth (such as "I copied 0 lines of code") seems doubtful to aggravate anything if they are truthful. So there are separate issues of IP: Great, but they are neither worsened or relieved by a statement about code, are they?
Luc 12y ago
One thing I've often wondered: how does one even find the best lawyer, with the most appropriate experience etc.? It seems you'd almost need another lawyer, who knows the best people in each specialty, to advise you.
- james-skemp 12y ago
  You have a couple options, as I see it (there could be more): Find someone who's had to deal with something similar to find out who they used and their experience. Contact a state or local bar association. In Wisconsin our state bar has a lawyer referral program. They're not necessarily the best in their field, but they're a good start, and a limited consult might be free or of little cost.
  - Luc 12y ago
    Thanks. I just checked the website of my local bar association, and they have a search form with about a dozen specialities. That doesn't narrow it down a lot, but it's a start.
    - james-skemp 12y ago
      They might have a number to call. Our online form had basic functionality like that, but calling let you talk to a staff member who could help you clarify what you might actually need. (I worked as a web developer for a number if years there, and the form didn't get updated much while I was there.)
- pjc50 12y ago
  There always remains the possibility that you may not be able to find a suitable one at all: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-crawley-others.pdf http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgment... This recent high-profile case has been thrown out because nobody that legal aid is willing to pay (for the defendants) for is capable of handling it. Even the first step, "read 10,000 pages of documents", is not affordable since the legal aid cuts. That document describes the desperate search for someone suitable and willing ("silk" == barrister or QC, required at this level of court)
ilamont 12y ago
An interesting counterpoint to this is Julie Ann Horvath, who leveraged Twitter to expose a toxic culture at Github (1) and eventually forced the CEO and his wife to leave the company (2), and has kept Github and certain employees on the defensive (3). She may have to deal with legal repercussions because of her actions on Twitter, but I can't help but think that nothing would have changed had she kept silent or quietly hired an employment lawyer after being forced out. 1. http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/19/5526574/github-sexism-scandal-julie-ann-horvath http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/19/5526574/github-sexism-scan... 2. http://recode.net/2014/04/21/julie-ann-horvath-on-github-investigation-how-do-you-sleep-at-night/ http://recode.net/2014/04/21/julie-ann-horvath-on-github-inv... 3. http://www.dailydot.com/business/julie-ann-horvath-names-github-harassment/ http://www.dailydot.com/business/julie-ann-horvath-names-git...
- jacquesm 12y ago
  When you're on the offensive things change considerably.
  - jpmattia 12y ago
    That would make for a good followup article.
- teacup50 12y ago
  It's an interesting counter-point, but I'm not sure it's an example to be lauded; most of her complaints were found to have no basis in fact, and she's likely poisoned any future legal suit she might wish to bring. Additionally, she's incurred significant personal liability in the process. > She may have to deal with legal repercussions because of her actions on Twitter, but I can't help but think that nothing would have changed had she kept silent or quietly hired an employment lawyer after being forced out. I can't help but think the court of public opinion has been used to bludgeon an opponent, not achieve justice. The public absolutely lacks the facts necessary to judge the merits of the accusations, and the objectivity necessary won't be forthcoming through inciting angry internet mobs. This wasn't something as simple as Sterling's overt racism -- and even then, the public's ability to observe and act on his overt racism wasn't possible until it saw the cold light of day through objective and verifiable evidence. The safest and likely most productive way for GitHub to be held to account, if GitHub as an organization needed to be held to account, was by providing a clear, objective statement of the allegations, vetted by her lawyer, and if possible, a tenacious lawsuit and refusal to settle for anything less than a public statement.
cgshaw 12y ago
(another attorney here) Tweets aren't under oath or anything, but it opens up Carmack to lots of questions and possibly affects his credibility. Often times cases come down to "he said / she said" types of claims and how a jury views them. If ZeniMax mentions the tweets in court, it will likely be to try and make Carmack look like he acted out of hand, and that he rushed to make claims that arne't true (i.e. the IP / code distinction the poster makes). Here's the thing about software suits. Most judges / juries are in a TERRIBLE position when it comes to evaluating the nuance involved in a suit like this. Think about the average person and how much they understand about what you do. Lawyers will try to boil it down to themes and narratives that portray you as "bad." "Winning" in terms of how you evaluate claims or the press or your followers evaluate claims does not matter. It's all about how the lawyers convince a judge or jury you are wrong.
- bhartzer 12y ago
  Wouldn't most attorneys advise their client to keep quiet and not post on Twitter and talk to the media about the case?
  - esquivalience 12y ago
    It's not always that simple. There is never anything wrong with talking about a case in principle. As an attorney myself I am often asked to look over this sort of article, press release or other notification. I encourage my clients to be open if they have nothing to hide. However even posting honest, accurate articles online can come back to haunt you. Unless written very precisely, words can be interpreted by different people differently and often in a way that wasn't intended by the author. This process doesn't have to be a cynical twisting of words - naturally, a reader's interpretation will be informed by their pre-existing point of view. When that view is one of a litigant, it can open up new issues in a case and lead to new ways to analyse evidence. If you are posting about a case, make sure you're doing it calmly and definitely get it edited by your lawyer! [edited for accuracy, typos]
    - afarrell 12y ago
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
mathattack 12y ago
I found a true gem hiding amidst great advice: the only lawyer that’s yours is the one you pay Corporate lawyers exist to protect the corporation.
motdiem 12y ago
Without commenting on why Zenimax would launch such a lawsuit now and be public about it, I can't help but see Carmack's response as a potential intimidation move, e.g "You may win in court, but you will lose in the court of public opinion, and this will hurt your business more than losing this suit. Now think again about wether you really want to sue".
- jacquesm 12y ago
  That would be an exceedingly dumb strategy because if such a link could be made then it would open up Carmack to yet another round of damages if the suit would be lost. Blackmail is not a sound legal strategy if you have a lot to lose. If you're on your last dime and you don't own anything that can be seized you might try this route.
  - darkarmani 12y ago
    > That would be an exceedingly dumb strategy because if such a link could be made then it would open up Carmack to yet another round of damages if the suit would be lost. How exactly? Plenty of people sue a company, lose the case, and still do a lot of damage to the company because of the distraction and public confidence. One example, is startups getting sued that are looking for another round of investment. They are definitely harmed even if they win the lawsuit. It cuts both ways. Sometimes a victory can be made to cost more than settling -- for either side. That's why people settle. If you can make the PR cost higher, the price to settle comes down.
jfoster 12y ago
I understand what the common wisdom is ("shut-up") when it comes to this type of thing, and I understand the stated reason why ("it will get used against you!"), but I don't understand the "how" part. Carmack made a very clear, short public message about it. Rather than being any kind of admission, it was the opposite. A complete denial. How could Zenimax use that to strengthen their case? He's likely to repeat the same denial to the court anyway. I'm not pretending I know better than the common wisdom, just trying to understand it better. If you were Zenimax, how would you use this tweet against him?
- jacquesm 12y ago
  It wasn't a complete denial ('code' and 'patents' are not the only work products protected by IP laws and by employment contract terms). That alone makes me believe this was not vetted by his lawyer unless they specifically wanted to misdirect the opposition. I don't think that's likely, and such misdirection would most likely fail anyway assuming the opposite side is halfway competent. Making falsifiable claims in public simply does not help. As for how Zenimax could use this against Carmack, let's not make their lives easier than we have to.
personZ 12y ago
I am very confused that Carmack finds himself in such a position. Carmack quite famously made "Fuck You Money" over a decade ago. He was driving garages full of super expensive cars. He should have been the one with the levers. Instead he became, effectively, an employee again. Why? Why would he do that?
- jacquesm 12y ago
  funding Armadillo can't have been cheap. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadillo_Aerospace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadillo_Aerospace
  - bchjam 12y ago
    pretty much, he said Armadillo had drained all of his 'crazy money' at a QuakeCon a couple years ago
TodPunk 12y ago
This article has some flaws. For instance, Carmack isn't getting sued, Oculus/Facebook is. Also, I didn't get the impression that Carmack was "angry" when he tweeted that. I always get the impression that he is pretty calm about all of the things he's saying, and the two tweets being referenced are just statements about his perception on the case. Since anger is the tone of the entire "mistake" from the article's perspective, it seems the article author is the one jumping to conclusions and writing things on the internet before they're due.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  Good points! Have an upvote... The actual defendant for now is Oculus Rift (because I suspect that's where the money is), but Carmack is very much in the line of fire (as the one who allegedly did the deed) and is currently CTO of Oculus Rift, so even if he's not the named party he definitely is in a defensive position here. On top of that his current interest is in this particular case probably not aligned with Oculus Rift. That means that your words should be weighed on a gold scale, especially when uttered through a public medium. I've fixed the post to take into account your comments.
- personZ 12y ago
  I've gotten my karma pummeling elsewhere in this thread for taking this to task, but this is one of those cases where raw speculation is voted up on HN purely because the speaker panders to this audience, and the audience returns the favor. Put that blog post under a less known (on HN at least) name and it would would rightly have disappeared as raw uninformed speculation.
peterwwillis 12y ago
What to do when people make you angry online: 1. GET OFF SOCIAL MEDIA. Everything you say and do will make you a target. The only things you can say that might help you would be contrition, so if you're not willing to do that, get the hell off social media. This is also good because it removes you from having to read things about yourself that people are saying. People's talk will not harm you; your reaction to people's talk will harm you. 2. GET AN OFFLINE JOURNAL. If you have strong feelings, write them out. Write until you can't feel anymore. But don't put it online; keep it offline. The purpose is to have an exercise that gets your thoughts out, and to be able to read through your thoughts and clarify them later. Write letters to the people you're angry with, then review them and edit them many times, and never send them. 3. TALK TO FRIENDS. It's incredibly easy to let internalizing your feelings change how you think, change your memories, and turn you into a shell of your former self. You can even develop anxiety disorders or PTSD if this gets out of hand. Talk to people who understand and love you and let them keep you in check. You need positive outside influences to keep yourself sane. Talk to a good psychiatrist if you can. 4. KEEP THE BIG PICTURE IN MIND. It's easy to confuse yourself and wrestle over details. Start by considering the intent of your actions, and work from there to understand the whole chain of events, impartial and without emotion. It takes a while to get there. Be totally honest with yourself, but don't convince yourself of things that you didn't do.
- wpietri 12y ago
  Yes, yes, yes. Excellent advice. The only thing I'd add is that it can be worth being visible about this. If you can make a polite and neutral statement before disappearing, that can help. E.g., "I wasn't expecting such a strong reaction; I obviously need to take some time to think this over and talk with friends before saying more in public."
- pimlottc 12y ago
  > 1. GET OFF SOCIAL MEDIA. Everything you say and do will make you a target. The only things you can say that might help you would be contrition IANAL, but this seems like bad advice. If there's litigation involved, any sort of apology could be taken as an admission of guilt.
_sabe_ 12y ago
I always wrote complex crappy code for my previous employer, because if some of my own projects ever takes flight, I wouldn't want to be in an IP lawsuit against my own code. Thus I saved the neat implementations for my own projects, and actually I don't even feel bad about it. If you have a boss constantly reminding you about that you have a contract where they own anything you produce, then thats what you get. It's called the cobra effect.
simonebrunozzi 12y ago
This is a HARD thing to cope with. I've been through it once, and I lost much sleep over many nights just because of it. Especially the first time, you have NO idea on how to deal with it. I can say that the best advice is to do nothing UNTIL you talk to your lawyer, and I can confirm that YOUR lawyer means the one YOU pay. Try to stay calm. Things like this take months, sometimes even years, to unfold. Good luck.

130 points by bussetta 12y ago

throwaway9988 12y ago

I'm curious to when/if there are exceptions to this standard advice. When could it be a strategic move?

danielrmay 12y ago
When your lawyer tells you it is a strategic move.
- josefresco 12y ago
  Agreed. Also it can help with this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_of_public_opinion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_of_public_opinion which can be a major factor in the outcome.
arethuza 12y ago
I can't think of any - I know that having been sued (OK it was my start-up, but I took it rather personally) and it was incredibly stressful and at the start I nearly replied to the other side with communications trying to naively "sort things out" that could have made things even worse. My stress levels decreased hugely when all communication was put into the hands of our lawyers - and it was eventually resolved with both sides walking away and paying their own expenses, which wasn't great as we had done nothing wrong but was probably the least worst option. Honestly - if someone raises a legal action against you - talk to a lawyer who specializes in the relevant area and do what they tell you, which is likely to include no public statement without their approval.
- stingraycharles 12y ago
  Exactly. The desire for communication with the public is mostly based on emotion, not on a rational decision. Lawyers give you rational advice. Having been involved in a lawsuit last year, even after I won, I still don't dare to publicly talk about it for fear or repercussions. I simply ask myself: what do I have to gain, and what do I have to lose? Usually the risks and impact of the things I have to lose outweigh the things I have to gain, and it's a good way of making myself shut up.
patio11 12y ago
Approximately as frequently as when replacing John Carmack with a lawyer would improve your codebase.
TomGullen 12y ago
Perhaps if you can't afford a good lawyer to defend yourself so you have to attack the reputation of the sueing company hoping they will drop it from public pressure?
6cxs2hd6 12y ago
For criminal matters, the short answer is, never. See Don't Talk to the Police. [1]. You want a defense attorney to handle this. For civil matters, although IANAL I think similar reasons apply, so similar answer: Don't Talk to the Public. If you're truly famous enough to need to break this rule, then you need an attorney who specializes in high-profile cases like this. Edit: By "cases like this", I mean an actor or athlete level of celebrity. Probably not John Carmack, despite how famous and awesome he may be within our circles. Really, the smartest thing is to just "shut up". Even though a false accusation is a genuine personal violation and you want to defend yourself, the best defense usually won't be DIY. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
kubiiii 12y ago
Maybe when your position largely depends on the public opinion and will be taken from you before you have a chance to have a trial. Maybe there is no pattern but elected officials, rock stars, often cry out their innocence when being accused of something, while having great lawyers.

buro9 12y ago

A possible exception: When you have no means to afford a lawyer and the case is obviously frivolous. Whilst I would nearly always go for shutting up, we've probably all witnessed the David being sued by a Goliath and their only viable action is to make it know and get support. That isn't what's happening here though... but no rule is black and white.

danieltillett 12y ago
Yes when you have nothing to lose you can afford to not worry about the legal niceties.
nailer 12y ago
Also: if you're a game developer, and Zenimax offers you a job, and you know this is how they treat people people who've moved on, you might consider taking a different role.

milliams 12y ago

Perhaps his lawyer okayed his tweets.

sbarre 12y ago
Then he should get a new lawyer

michaelq 12y ago

While that may help you in the courtroom, the court of public opinion doesn't wait for a verdict. It confuses silence with guilt. Acquittals are less likely to make front pages than acquittals.

arrrg 12y ago
Does the public care about this? I really don’t think so. This is a case about some boring legalities. I really can’t see it having any impact on how Carmack is viewed. There are probably many other situation in which that is not the case, but here I really can’t see anything bad happening as a consequence of Carmack not responding publicly.
- prof_hobart 12y ago
  About this - possibly not. About other things that people, particularly celebs, are taken to court for - absolutely.
- dnissley 12y ago
  What about gamers? They are their customers, and they can be a fickle bunch under the right circumstances. A recent example could be the reaction to the DRM in the latest sim city, and other games. A counterexample however could be EA, which most gamers loathe but continues to sell plenty of games. (Edit: Although now that I actually look it up EA is behind sim city. So who knows.)
  - arrrg 12y ago
    Gamers don’t care at all about people stealing IP. They don’t have a problem with it.
danieltillett 12y ago
This is true. Sometimes it is better to respond and risk losing in the legal court of tomorrow than stay silent and lose in the court of public opinion today.
gvb 12y ago

devhinton 12y ago

Why is this up-voted? This is basically don't be a dumb-ass 101

smcl 12y ago

I'm confused - was the case of John Carmack cited because his tweets have now been raised in court and have hurt his case? I haven't been following this situation so I've zero context.

Alphasite_ 12y ago
It's only been a day to two since thise was public, I'm doubtful that they're being mentioned in court.
- smcl 12y ago
  Ah so it's just general cautionary advice. I'd be interested to see if this comes up in court.

motters 12y ago

If someone makes a spurious allegation against you then I think you should defend yourself as much as possible, including via tweets or any other communication channels. Refuse to go quietly into the night.

zavulon 12y ago
Did you read the article? The point is you're making it worse by tweeting and making other public statements. You may win in court of public opinion, but you're making it easier for your opponent to beat you in actual court.
- personZ 12y ago
  The blog post is pure speculation by what appears to be a layman. It has no more weight than any random comment on HN. It's worth stating that because people are treating it as if a famed IP lawyer has made a pronouncement of fact, when in actuality it's just someone giving, like, an opinion, man.
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    Let's see a famed IP lawyer that would disagree with the premise of the article. Attack the contents, if you can. There are several lawyers that I know of right here in this thread and I don't see anybody contradicting the advice.
    - personZ 12y ago
      Unnecessarily defensive. Was there something, anything, in my comment that is incorrect? Are you actually a contract/IP lawyer? Note that I'm not saying that you are wrong, because honestly I don't know. Because I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know all of the specifics of this case. But am I wrong in what I said about the authority of the post? This is why people preface things with IANAL. People often petition to the public (Tesla quite recently) in such cases -- regardless of pending lawsuits -- because the damage in perception can be larger than any possible legal damage. And stating simple facts of truth (such as "I copied 0 lines of code") seems doubtful to aggravate anything if they are truthful. So there are separate issues of IP: Great, but they are neither worsened or relieved by a statement about code, are they?

Luc 12y ago

One thing I've often wondered: how does one even find the best lawyer, with the most appropriate experience etc.? It seems you'd almost need another lawyer, who knows the best people in each specialty, to advise you.

james-skemp 12y ago
You have a couple options, as I see it (there could be more): Find someone who's had to deal with something similar to find out who they used and their experience. Contact a state or local bar association. In Wisconsin our state bar has a lawyer referral program. They're not necessarily the best in their field, but they're a good start, and a limited consult might be free or of little cost.
- Luc 12y ago
  Thanks. I just checked the website of my local bar association, and they have a search form with about a dozen specialities. That doesn't narrow it down a lot, but it's a start.
  - james-skemp 12y ago
    They might have a number to call. Our online form had basic functionality like that, but calling let you talk to a staff member who could help you clarify what you might actually need. (I worked as a web developer for a number if years there, and the form didn't get updated much while I was there.)
pjc50 12y ago
There always remains the possibility that you may not be able to find a suitable one at all: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-crawley-others.pdf http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgment... This recent high-profile case has been thrown out because nobody that legal aid is willing to pay (for the defendants) for is capable of handling it. Even the first step, "read 10,000 pages of documents", is not affordable since the legal aid cuts. That document describes the desperate search for someone suitable and willing ("silk" == barrister or QC, required at this level of court)

ilamont 12y ago

An interesting counterpoint to this is Julie Ann Horvath, who leveraged Twitter to expose a toxic culture at Github (1) and eventually forced the CEO and his wife to leave the company (2), and has kept Github and certain employees on the defensive (3). She may have to deal with legal repercussions because of her actions on Twitter, but I can't help but think that nothing would have changed had she kept silent or quietly hired an employment lawyer after being forced out. 1. http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/19/5526574/github-sexism-scandal-julie-ann-horvath http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/19/5526574/github-sexism-scan... 2. http://recode.net/2014/04/21/julie-ann-horvath-on-github-investigation-how-do-you-sleep-at-night/ http://recode.net/2014/04/21/julie-ann-horvath-on-github-inv... 3. http://www.dailydot.com/business/julie-ann-horvath-names-github-harassment/ http://www.dailydot.com/business/julie-ann-horvath-names-git...

jacquesm 12y ago
When you're on the offensive things change considerably.
- jpmattia 12y ago
  That would make for a good followup article.
teacup50 12y ago
It's an interesting counter-point, but I'm not sure it's an example to be lauded; most of her complaints were found to have no basis in fact, and she's likely poisoned any future legal suit she might wish to bring. Additionally, she's incurred significant personal liability in the process. > She may have to deal with legal repercussions because of her actions on Twitter, but I can't help but think that nothing would have changed had she kept silent or quietly hired an employment lawyer after being forced out. I can't help but think the court of public opinion has been used to bludgeon an opponent, not achieve justice. The public absolutely lacks the facts necessary to judge the merits of the accusations, and the objectivity necessary won't be forthcoming through inciting angry internet mobs. This wasn't something as simple as Sterling's overt racism -- and even then, the public's ability to observe and act on his overt racism wasn't possible until it saw the cold light of day through objective and verifiable evidence. The safest and likely most productive way for GitHub to be held to account, if GitHub as an organization needed to be held to account, was by providing a clear, objective statement of the allegations, vetted by her lawyer, and if possible, a tenacious lawsuit and refusal to settle for anything less than a public statement.

cgshaw 12y ago

(another attorney here) Tweets aren't under oath or anything, but it opens up Carmack to lots of questions and possibly affects his credibility. Often times cases come down to "he said / she said" types of claims and how a jury views them. If ZeniMax mentions the tweets in court, it will likely be to try and make Carmack look like he acted out of hand, and that he rushed to make claims that arne't true (i.e. the IP / code distinction the poster makes). Here's the thing about software suits. Most judges / juries are in a TERRIBLE position when it comes to evaluating the nuance involved in a suit like this. Think about the average person and how much they understand about what you do. Lawyers will try to boil it down to themes and narratives that portray you as "bad." "Winning" in terms of how you evaluate claims or the press or your followers evaluate claims does not matter. It's all about how the lawyers convince a judge or jury you are wrong.

bhartzer 12y ago
Wouldn't most attorneys advise their client to keep quiet and not post on Twitter and talk to the media about the case?
- esquivalience 12y ago
  It's not always that simple. There is never anything wrong with talking about a case in principle. As an attorney myself I am often asked to look over this sort of article, press release or other notification. I encourage my clients to be open if they have nothing to hide. However even posting honest, accurate articles online can come back to haunt you. Unless written very precisely, words can be interpreted by different people differently and often in a way that wasn't intended by the author. This process doesn't have to be a cynical twisting of words - naturally, a reader's interpretation will be informed by their pre-existing point of view. When that view is one of a litigant, it can open up new issues in a case and lead to new ways to analyse evidence. If you are posting about a case, make sure you're doing it calmly and definitely get it edited by your lawyer! [edited for accuracy, typos]
  - afarrell 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

mathattack 12y ago

I found a true gem hiding amidst great advice: the only lawyer that’s yours is the one you pay Corporate lawyers exist to protect the corporation.

motdiem 12y ago

Without commenting on why Zenimax would launch such a lawsuit now and be public about it, I can't help but see Carmack's response as a potential intimidation move, e.g "You may win in court, but you will lose in the court of public opinion, and this will hurt your business more than losing this suit. Now think again about wether you really want to sue".

jacquesm 12y ago
That would be an exceedingly dumb strategy because if such a link could be made then it would open up Carmack to yet another round of damages if the suit would be lost. Blackmail is not a sound legal strategy if you have a lot to lose. If you're on your last dime and you don't own anything that can be seized you might try this route.
- darkarmani 12y ago
  > That would be an exceedingly dumb strategy because if such a link could be made then it would open up Carmack to yet another round of damages if the suit would be lost. How exactly? Plenty of people sue a company, lose the case, and still do a lot of damage to the company because of the distraction and public confidence. One example, is startups getting sued that are looking for another round of investment. They are definitely harmed even if they win the lawsuit. It cuts both ways. Sometimes a victory can be made to cost more than settling -- for either side. That's why people settle. If you can make the PR cost higher, the price to settle comes down.

jfoster 12y ago

I understand what the common wisdom is ("shut-up") when it comes to this type of thing, and I understand the stated reason why ("it will get used against you!"), but I don't understand the "how" part. Carmack made a very clear, short public message about it. Rather than being any kind of admission, it was the opposite. A complete denial. How could Zenimax use that to strengthen their case? He's likely to repeat the same denial to the court anyway. I'm not pretending I know better than the common wisdom, just trying to understand it better. If you were Zenimax, how would you use this tweet against him?

jacquesm 12y ago
It wasn't a complete denial ('code' and 'patents' are not the only work products protected by IP laws and by employment contract terms). That alone makes me believe this was not vetted by his lawyer unless they specifically wanted to misdirect the opposition. I don't think that's likely, and such misdirection would most likely fail anyway assuming the opposite side is halfway competent. Making falsifiable claims in public simply does not help. As for how Zenimax could use this against Carmack, let's not make their lives easier than we have to.

personZ 12y ago

I am very confused that Carmack finds himself in such a position. Carmack quite famously made "Fuck You Money" over a decade ago. He was driving garages full of super expensive cars. He should have been the one with the levers. Instead he became, effectively, an employee again. Why? Why would he do that?

jacquesm 12y ago
funding Armadillo can't have been cheap. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadillo_Aerospace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadillo_Aerospace
- bchjam 12y ago
  pretty much, he said Armadillo had drained all of his 'crazy money' at a QuakeCon a couple years ago

TodPunk 12y ago

This article has some flaws. For instance, Carmack isn't getting sued, Oculus/Facebook is. Also, I didn't get the impression that Carmack was "angry" when he tweeted that. I always get the impression that he is pretty calm about all of the things he's saying, and the two tweets being referenced are just statements about his perception on the case. Since anger is the tone of the entire "mistake" from the article's perspective, it seems the article author is the one jumping to conclusions and writing things on the internet before they're due.

jacquesm 12y ago
Good points! Have an upvote... The actual defendant for now is Oculus Rift (because I suspect that's where the money is), but Carmack is very much in the line of fire (as the one who allegedly did the deed) and is currently CTO of Oculus Rift, so even if he's not the named party he definitely is in a defensive position here. On top of that his current interest is in this particular case probably not aligned with Oculus Rift. That means that your words should be weighed on a gold scale, especially when uttered through a public medium. I've fixed the post to take into account your comments.
personZ 12y ago
I've gotten my karma pummeling elsewhere in this thread for taking this to task, but this is one of those cases where raw speculation is voted up on HN purely because the speaker panders to this audience, and the audience returns the favor. Put that blog post under a less known (on HN at least) name and it would would rightly have disappeared as raw uninformed speculation.

peterwwillis 12y ago

What to do when people make you angry online: 1. GET OFF SOCIAL MEDIA. Everything you say and do will make you a target. The only things you can say that might help you would be contrition, so if you're not willing to do that, get the hell off social media. This is also good because it removes you from having to read things about yourself that people are saying. People's talk will not harm you; your reaction to people's talk will harm you. 2. GET AN OFFLINE JOURNAL. If you have strong feelings, write them out. Write until you can't feel anymore. But don't put it online; keep it offline. The purpose is to have an exercise that gets your thoughts out, and to be able to read through your thoughts and clarify them later. Write letters to the people you're angry with, then review them and edit them many times, and never send them. 3. TALK TO FRIENDS. It's incredibly easy to let internalizing your feelings change how you think, change your memories, and turn you into a shell of your former self. You can even develop anxiety disorders or PTSD if this gets out of hand. Talk to people who understand and love you and let them keep you in check. You need positive outside influences to keep yourself sane. Talk to a good psychiatrist if you can. 4. KEEP THE BIG PICTURE IN MIND. It's easy to confuse yourself and wrestle over details. Start by considering the intent of your actions, and work from there to understand the whole chain of events, impartial and without emotion. It takes a while to get there. Be totally honest with yourself, but don't convince yourself of things that you didn't do.

wpietri 12y ago
Yes, yes, yes. Excellent advice. The only thing I'd add is that it can be worth being visible about this. If you can make a polite and neutral statement before disappearing, that can help. E.g., "I wasn't expecting such a strong reaction; I obviously need to take some time to think this over and talk with friends before saying more in public."
pimlottc 12y ago
> 1. GET OFF SOCIAL MEDIA. Everything you say and do will make you a target. The only things you can say that might help you would be contrition IANAL, but this seems like bad advice. If there's litigation involved, any sort of apology could be taken as an admission of guilt.

_sabe_ 12y ago

I always wrote complex crappy code for my previous employer, because if some of my own projects ever takes flight, I wouldn't want to be in an IP lawsuit against my own code. Thus I saved the neat implementations for my own projects, and actually I don't even feel bad about it. If you have a boss constantly reminding you about that you have a contract where they own anything you produce, then thats what you get. It's called the cobra effect.

simonebrunozzi 12y ago

This is a HARD thing to cope with. I've been through it once, and I lost much sleep over many nights just because of it. Especially the first time, you have NO idea on how to deal with it. I can say that the best advice is to do nothing UNTIL you talk to your lawyer, and I can confirm that YOUR lawyer means the one YOU pay. Try to stay calm. Things like this take months, sometimes even years, to unfold. Good luck.