said by Jason Levine:If I were wrongly accused, I would have to serious consider the $3,000 settlement over fighting a lawsuit. I don't have much money to spare and while $3K would be a big hit on our bank account, paying a lawyer and spending the time fighting a lawsuit (which would likely not be based in a court near me) would be a bigger hit.
My best hope, if I fought back, would be that I would have the headache and expense of a lawsuit for a year or so, win and then have another headache/expense of trying to get the copyright group to pay my legal fees. If I was successful in that, I might even wind up even on money spent/won back. The time spent and stress inflicted on me would never be paid back, though.
In short, I wouldn't blame someone for taking the $3,000 shortcut. It is purposefully designed to be the easier path to getting your life back.
i wonder with how they pick distant courts if someone could refuse to pay anything and simply state. "That ruling did not happen in my own state, so it does not apply to me".
