alt Hacker NewsOf course the problem is that legally speaking, they don't cause any damage - service providers they target cause the damage. BS have no true authority over these service providers, just the threat of some legal claim. The service providers comply voluntarily as they don't want to spend time checking if the claim is valid.
Replies
Eh, dunno about that. They made what would appear to be a false complaint; hard to really consider what was going on here ‘fraud and phishing’!
That the magic robot perhaps did it for them matters not at all, in terms of whose fault it is, though a proliferation of magic robots does make junk services like this more of a problem, in that they can flood the internet with nonsense more effectively.
Then there needs to be some cost associated with sending a completely false claim.
Doesn’t need to be huge – just enough to cover their cost and thereby make it uneconomical to outsource the work these companies are charging their customers for to their targets.
I don't think this is the kind of advice a good lawyer would give.
BrandShield, Funko, and iwantmyname all caused serious financial harm through, at a minimum, tortious negligence.
I'm not a lawyer, but even a yokel like me knows there's more to this legally than a shrug and "the software did it".