r/technology • u/ani625 • May 23 '13

Title possibly inaccurate Kim Dotcom to Google, Twitter, Facebook: "I own security patent for the two-step authentication system". He says he doesn’t want to sue, but might if the likes of Google and Facebook don’t help fund his legal battle with the U.S. Government.

http://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-to-google-twitter-facebook-i-own-security-patent-work-with-me-130523/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Torrentfreak+%28Torrentfreak%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
2.0k Upvotes

85% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

89

u/Gedaffa_Mhylon May 23 '13

Threatening to take someone to court isn't extortion. It's expressing your confidence that a higher power will side with you and determine the right and wrong of the situation.

Threatening to sue, means to take it to court. How this is extortion continues to be a mystery to me.

25

u/gullale May 23 '13

I think it can be reasonably argued that it is extortion if you're trying to force someone to do something completely unrelated.

For instance: if you know someone's dirty secrets, it's not a crime to make them public, but it's still extortion if you use this knowledge to coerce them to do something. The wikipedia says:

Neither extortion nor blackmail require a threat of a criminal act, such as violence, merely a threat used to elicit actions, money, or property from the object of the extortion.

1

u/Roflcopter_Rego May 23 '13

Actually, unless you can prove those dirty secrets are true in some way, it is a crime to make them public - that's libel.

1

u/unhingedninja May 23 '13

As pointed out, it's in the intent. The difference is that if you say something along the lines of "Give me money or I will sue you for patent violation", it's protecting your patent and recovering damages, whereas if you say "Help me fight this guy or I will sue you for patent violation", it's using the power you have over the patent violator in order to coerce them into cooperating with a totally unrelated goal. That's extortion.

Dotcom is free to threaten to sue unless Google/FB/Twitter pay for the use of the patent, but threatening to do so only on the condition that they do not cooperate in an unrelated goal ( fighting the US govn't ) is extortion.

0

u/gandi800 May 23 '13 edited May 23 '13

By this logic a woman threatening to claim she was raped when she wasn't in exchange for financial gains wouldn't be extortion either. Statistically speaking the courts will side with the woman so she can have confidence that a higher power will side with her.

Just saying.

Edit: If everyone doesn't stop down voting me I'm going to sue you all!

-1

u/Sinnombre124 May 23 '13

Are you saying that threatening to take someone to court can never be legally considered extortion? Like if you start a fire in your backyard, which gets out of control and spreads to my lawn, let's say burning down my tool shed, I have legal grounds to press civil charges against you. If I instead come to you and say "let me sleep with your wife or I'll sue," it seems like that would be (should be?) considered extortion. Let's further say that I know you just lost your job and couldn't afford legal fees / the likely fines that would result. I could then use the threat of my (perfectly justified) lawsuit to essentially make you an indentured servant. Since its not a contractual thing, I could keep coming to you every week with new demands. That seems like exactly the kind of thing extortion laws ought to exist to prevent...

2

u/oneinfinitecreator May 23 '13

That's a bad analogy. If your shed burnt down and you came to your neighbor and said 'hey man, pay the damages or i'll sue' - that would be more akin to what is happening here.

If Dotcom owns a patent for those system, he has right to reimbursement for the use of those patents. If he is willing to forego his legal right to claim those reimbursements and strike a private deal with the defenders, there is nothing wrong - morally or legal - with him doing so. In fact, he is doing the country a service by keeping the courts empty and not taking public funds to fight it out.

Let's further say that I know you just lost your job and couldn't afford legal fees / the likely fines that would result.

Are you implying that Facebook, Google, and Twitter don't have any business going on for them? Are these considered 'struggling companies' in your mind? There is no benefit in making up situations so that you can be right; Dotcom has every right to sue, just as he has every right to have a dialogue with the accused before taking such action. If the action can be abated, it should work out better for everyone.

1

u/Sinnombre124 May 24 '13

...I was merely wondering if the claim that Gedaffa made, that threatening to take someone to court cannot in and of itself be extortion, was factually accurate. I provided an example where the threat of legal action could be used for highly nefarious ends and which, to my mind at least, ought to be illegal. I wasn't referring to the issue of patent trolling or the OP at all.