• 8 Posts
  • 338 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 26th, 2023

help-circle




  • There are two parts. First, they aren’t as underpaid as most people think in most cases. The union isn’t dumb. When they negotiate they look at the long term. A career teacher (30 to 35 years) can retire at about 55 give or take depending on the district. And they will get something like 80% of thier salary for the rest of thier life. They will also get subsidized health insurance. And in some states, all of that is tax free. That is a ton of money and a ton of security. And for many, they can retire, collect pension, and go get another job at the same time if they want. I make more than double what teachers make best case, and my wife works too for a 6 figure salary. I can’t possibly retire at 55, let alone feel secure doing so. I also have been laid off twice over the last 30 years, where as most teacher don’t have to worry about that after 10 years. Now, I get to take vacation anytime of the year, I can change jobs or move and not mess up my future benefits. I don’t have to deal with parents. Lots of intangible benefits to not being a teacher. But the point is the union ensures those less obvious benefits, which keeps the current salary low. This keeps the optics of drastically underpaid teachers so that the union can still negotiate for more with public sentiment on thier side. So while they are still underpaid, it isn’t as drastic as it would appear.

    The other reason is simple. There are a lot of teachers. Like a lot a lot. And schools are generally built to a higher standard of saftey, so they are much more expensive than other building types. All of this adds up to a very high cost. Education is typically one of the largest expenditures for a state budget. Poloticians could dump more money into it, but it isn’t likely to be enough to make a difference that will get them reelected. So they put money other places that will get them votes.

    That’s your reasons why.









  • I’m not sure you are following my logic. For them to take every person who shares a plex server with people to court would cost an exorbitant amount of money. First they have to find them all, which is non-trivial. We are talking hundreds of thousands here. Then they have to get proof according to local laws. That already requires them to employ experts in each jurisdiction. Then they can send the letters, which have to be tailored based on the jurisdiction, which probably isn’t much, but they have to be sure it is legal to even send it. Some places (though few) it will open them to being sued if not worded correctly. Then to take it to court they will need licensed lawyers in every jurisdiction. The cost would be crazy. And for the cases they win, they won’t get much money because they aren’t sueing companies, they are sueing people.
    It’s not that a person would necessarily win in court, they may or may not. But the scale of the expense is soo much higher than the revenue as to make it a very bad financial undertaking.


  • You don’t have to respond to the letter at all. That’s my point. It has virtually no meaning other then to allow them to say “I told you so” in court. And for that to have any meaning, they would have to show that you knew the letter came from the legit rights owner. Since the name is likely something none of us have actually heard of, you could argue you didn’t think it was legit. But to even get to that point they have to file a suit and pay lawyers and all that. I can send you a cease and desist letter claiming the right to tell you to stop doing anything I want. It’s just a scare tactic. Plenty of companies have been caught sending them when they had no legal right to make the demand. Most pirates know this, and will just ignore it.


  • You can trick people into paying… but if you are talking people who pirate media, your sucess rate will be pretty low. Legally, cease and desist letters do nothing on thier own other than prove you notified them. Any free defense lawyer would argue that thier client didn’t believe the sender had any right to make the request, and the send provided no legal proof. But again, even ifnthey could get say 100k from each person running one of these. It wouldn’t pay they law firm bills, not even close. It would be a major expense.


  • Well for starters, those 100k would be spread all over legal jurisdictions, like even different countries. So you would need a representative certified to practice law in each of those jurisdictions. And of course the laws are different, so each case would be different. And the people you are suing have relatively little money to pay in compensation. The number of people needed to pull that off would be so high that the cost would be drastically larger than the potential financial gains. And since the board of directors have a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders, they would have to put a stop to it. The shareholders care little for the long term potential gains of such an enormous expense.