Lawyers sending threat letters sometimes claim that the recipient would violate the firm’s copyright by posting it online. This post is about Public Citizen’s response to one dumb threat letter and its decision to post the letter online despite the copyright claim.

Public Citizen’s response can be found here.

Interesting notes:

- Words like “scam” and “nightmare” are statement of rhetorical opinion that do not support a claim for defamation. McCabe v. Rattiner, 814 F.2d 839, 842 (1st Cir. 1987).

- The letter ends with “Please be aware that this letter is copyrighted by our law firm, and you are not authorized to republish this in any manner. Use of this letter in a posting, in full or in part, will subject you to further legal causes of action”. Such a posting would be fair use.

Note: This is a US case and thus may or may not applicable to Singapore laws.