Hacker News Reader

Comment by hermitcrab | Hacker News Reader

Author here. Since you asked. This TV comedy included a plot point where some wedding planning software was shown to lose the seating plan. The wedding planning software was clearly a mockup (probably done in Powerpoint), but was clearly based on my software - even including icons I had created. I thought I could get some free publicity from it. I talked to a lawyer friend of my father's and he told me it would cost hundreds of pounds to do the research to even send them a legal letter. It was the early days for PerfectTablePlan and I didn't have that sort of money. So I just wrote my own letter demanding a public apology. I'm still awaiting a reply, nearly 20 years later.

View on HN

The JD in the signature of that kind of letter usually amounts to more weight than the content, regardless of whether the wording was perfect and the research duly diligent.

What is JD?

Juris Doctor or Doctor of Jurisprudence [0], a kind of law degree

In this case, it refers to the literal letters written in the signature of a letter, which presumably indicate that whoever wrote it studied a bunch to get into school, paid a bunch to go to school, graduated with that degree, and should be respected, because they may have the knowledge, willingness, and resources to take the words in the letter further, if they want to, given that they have already somewhat attached themselves to the cause in the form of the letter.

[0] https://law.stanford.edu/office-of-student-affairs/the-docto...

Damn. I am familiar with that term but hit a cache miss.

And the legal right. The constitutional right to self-representation applies only to criminal proceedings and not all civil courts permit it.

Juris Doctor, aka a lawyer

Juris Doctor. A lawyer.

Big media production companies care a lot about copyright, but only when it's their copyrights being threatened.

Jonathan Coulton released a cover of "Baby Got Back" with a melody he composed himself. The entire song, melody and lyrics, was appropriated without permission by Fox and performed on an episode of Glee by the cast. (I say "lyrics" because even the change of "Mix-a-Lot's in trouble" to "Jonny C's in trouble", referring to Coulton himself, was preserved in the Glee version.) When Coulton wrote a letter demanding at least acknowledgement of the original elements he contributed to the cover song, Fox insisted that their asses were covered because they paid the ASCAP fees and did not have to seek permission for, nor acknowledge, the use of a cover of a song they licensed.

If you understand laws as weapons with which the rich protect themselves from the poor, a whole lot of shit starts making sense...

Funny but kind of sad. If it were the reverse, and The Little Guy used Sony's IP without permission, 20 Sony lawyers would come down on him with the ferocity of a thousand gods and destroy his business. It sucks how much the legal industry serves the rich and is effectively only accessible to the rich.

Only 20?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com