Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to bent
Re: Messy said by bent:What I'd really be interested to see is not if Wikileaks stays down (is there really any such thing on the internet? mirrors galore.) but if any criminal prosecutions result from the leaked documents. 7:5 says there won't be. I agree. Most companies don't want the PR associated with prosecuting employee theft, defamation, etc. Even more if the company's main selling points is keeping its customers identities secret.
If they pushed for criminal theft charges, or brought a defamation suit they'd have to identify which documents are forged. Probably confront the former employee who stole the documents. And, all under oath (which is a problem if they have scruples concerning honesty, which is a big if.).
The way they're playing it now is smart. They've called into question the veracity of all the documents by asserting that some are forged. They don't have to say which is which. All they have to do is say "even if we dispute that all the documents are ours, the defendant depicts them as such, and therefore for the purpose of copyright we'll say there is no dispute in this regard."
The other interesting thing is that they have clear access to legal remedy under copyright because it's an international treaty. It's not clear if it's as easy to claim violation of trade secrets (DMCA) or defamation if they're not a US entity. Does DMCA and defamation laws, access to US courts apply to foreigners without a treaty? (Maybe the bank has US offices.).
Mark |
