In 2000, I wrote a Linux device driver that “decrypted” the output of a certain device, and my company, which hosted open-source projects, agreed to host it.
The “encryption” was only a XOR, but that was enough for the maker of said device to sue my company under 17 U.S.C. § 1201 for hundreds of millions in damages.
The story got a lot of press back then because it highlighted how stupid the then-new DMCA was, and also because there was a David open-source enthusiasts vs. Goliath heartless corporation flavor to it.
Our lawyer decided to pick up the fight to generate free publicity for our fledgling company. For discovery, the maker of the device requested “a copy of any and all potentially infringing source code”. They weren’t specific and they didn’t specify the medium.
So we printed the entire Linux kernel source code including my driver in 5-pt font and sent them the boxes of printouts. Legally they had been served, so there was nothing they could do about it.
I don’t know. I didn’t do the printing. The law firm did it. But I remember our lawyer mentioning that they fedexed over 20 cartons of printing paper. Assuming 500 sheets per ream and 5 reams per carton, that would be 50,000 sheets, or 100,000 pages since it was printed on both sides to be even more annoying.
Your lawyer destroyed a forest to comply maliciously. Sort of not the best way to do it IMO.
Na, they’ve got managed forests and it’s fine. Your comment had me google to see and it’s actually pretty interesting.
As somebody who lives in an area with an active logging industry, I can tell you that parts of the world with an economic interest in their forests still have lots of trees whereas areas that do not are very likely to have destroyed most of theirs.
The relationship between paper use and the environment is not what you think it is.