Hacker News Reader

Comment by meepmorp | Hacker News Reader

So, if you don't do business in India, why follow the court order?

I understand Reuters taking down the article, but why would Lawfare or other blogs comply? What could an Indian court possibly do to someone entirely outside of their jurisdiction? It seems like the most appropriate response is "no, and we're going to publish the demand letters," which is exactly what techdirt did.

Let Rajat Khare - the guy who is likely behind Appin - file in a US (or EU, or wherever) court. In the US, at least, he'd have to provide some evidence that the article isn't true, which he probably can't.

Fuck Rajat Khare and Appin, the hacking company he almost certainly controls.

View on HN

> In the US, at least, he'd have to provide some evidence that the article isn't true, which he probably can't.

Realistically, he just has to be able to throw more money and lawyers at the situation than his opponents could. Maybe a bigger journalistic outfit could/would fight it, but the small blogs would probably be easy pickin'.

Being right can be time consuming and expensive. So unless they are prepared to defend themselves, people fold under the vaguest of threats.

You've got to at least have a vague threat in my jurisdiction though.

The vague threat is legal bills.

That depends on the jurisdiction. In UK (and jurisdictions following Commonwealth law), loser pays.

How do you win a case if you can't afford to see it through to the end?

Yea if I'm lucky, a lawyer takes me on contingency. That still leaves me with sunk time.

Reuters has many employees in India, and the Khare legal threats are issued by a US firm, Clare Locke, that describes its attorneys as "media assassins" [1] who have represented Russian oligarchs and people like Matt Lauer.

[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/metoo-media-assassins-clare-lo...

Well, the courts might not be able to do anything (unless some officer goes to India). But Rajat could direct his cadre of hackers at whoever ignores his demands.

How do you feel about people who don't do business in the US defying US court orders? Ignoring a court order may be something you can do, but it's generally not a good look.

I feel great, for example when local ISPs or seedbox providers take DMCA notices and flush them down the toilet.

(Yes, not the same as court order but same story)

I'd pay extra to get a livestream of that.

I understand that US courts are not sovereign everywhere in the world, just as North Korea's courts are not sovereign everywhere in the world. So I guess I'd feel indifference.

Maybe, but the USA have more global reach than NK. Depending on how much those courts want to push their requests and where you live or travel to, you might even end up extradated to the USA.

I don't especially care, particularly in a case where someone is suing to hide (ostensibly truthful) reporting on their shady dealings. If a US person were doing this in another country, I'd expect them to be told to fuck right off.

Would you just accede to the dictates of a court in a country to which you have no connection? That a much worse look, imo.

the better question is: why should a company be bound by laws outside of the areas they operate in?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com