Reply to post:

Sued for using HTTPS: Big brands told to cough up in crypto patent fight

Public Citizen

Unfortunately this sort of "legal adventurism" has no downside for the lawyer filing the lawsuit as there is no "looser pays" in US Civil Courts. Because most of the elected legislators are lawyers and the Trial Lawyers Associations are big check writers for the campaign coffers of their pet legislators the system won't change any time soon.

What needs to happen is for the lawyer, any staff, and any service providers employed by the law firm need to suddenly find themselves on a "service denial" list for any and all organizations they are attempting to shake down through their thinly veiled "trolling".

If they suddenly found themselves unable to obtain business insurance, personal insurance, access to any online shopping services and required to PAY CASH, with a substantial damage deposit for any lodging, car rental, and etc. they might just decide that there is no money to be made here and a lot of grief will accrue from the attempt to pursue this case.

I noted that there don't seem to be any Banks on the list, even though banks universally use HTTPS for all online banking services. Perhaps the law firm has already been informed by one or more banks that if they go there they may just find certain online transactions will become very-difficult-if-not-actually-impossible-to-complete?

I wonder if any of the paperwork for these filings was handled via an HTTPS connection over the internet?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon