CEG-TEK
A motion that made my day
Poor troll Marvin Cable… Recently he embarrassed himself by comparing his questionable conduct to John Adams’s actions:
Plaintiff is reminded of John Adams’ defense of the six soldiers in the Boston Massacre, in December 1770, where he took the case despite the reputational blow to his career as a lawyer, and said, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” Here, the facts are that Doe defendants violated Plaintiff’s rights, and federal rules allow for permissive joinder of these defendants. There are no facts, there are only speculations, that the Plaintiff is ill-ly using the Court system to fill its belly and that this Court cannot find ways to adjudicate each defendant in one civil action. As this Court respectfully noted in it’s denial of defendant’s request to recuse a judge in U.S. v. Bulger, it is irresponsible for this Court to comply to requests where parties “have chosen to make untrue accusations in the possible hope of subverting that process, or at the very least, forcing a delay of a trial by injecting a diversionary issue into the proceedings.” 1:99-cr-10371-RGS (D. Mass) at 9. Plaintiff feels this Court would agree that Defendants’ requests to sever based on tall tales or misconduct should not be complied with.
I suspect that another Adams, namely Samuel, was the inspiration of such passion.
I’m sure John Adams is turning in his grave, hearing that his noble actions are being compared to using underage pornography to extort quick cash from people who are defendants during the day but turn ISP subscribers at night. (As a weretroll himself, Marvin seemingly does not have any problem with this transformation.)
To commemorate this flabbergasting arrogance, Marvin Cable’s nickname will be “President Adams” from now on.
The brave defender of the “work of art” Dirty Little Schoolgirl Stories #4 proudly regards himself as a role model:
Another Court in this District noted there has been no report of Plaintiff’s Counsel (who is the same Counsel here in a similar case) engaging in any unethical or coercive tactics, using the content-matter to persuade people into settling. It has even been stated on the record in another Court in a similar case during a hearing (transcript for that hearing is currently being worked on by stenographer) that this Counsel (who is the same Counsel here), as opposed to many others around the country, is one of the most ethical and best to deal with. Plaintiff can nearly guarantee that every defense counsel that has dealt with plaintiffs’ counsel would agree, even those who submit fierce motions against plaintiff.
Well, Dan Booth agrees… kind of:
Note how Marvin “President Adams” Cable explained the reason why he missed the hearing: he did not check his email on a daily basis! Since courts went all electronic, dogs are dying from hunger: no more homework judge’s orders to eat. This lame excuse resulted in short but entertaining order:
Ch. Magistrate Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. ORDER Setting Hearing on Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Early Discovery (Docket # 43). Plaintiff’s counsel failed to appear for the hearing scheduled for October 5, 2012. The Court has re-scheduled this hearing for October 12, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 24. Plaintiff’s Counsel is directed to check his email notices from the Court on a daily rather than weekly basis. (Chernetsky, James) (Entered: 10/09/2012)
Updates
10/10/2012
Things go fast and downhill for Marvin “President Adams” Cable. The very same case, where he compared himself to Adams, just crumbled:
Docket Text: Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER severing all defendants but Doe 1 entered. Beneath the cloud of rhetoric, New Sensations, Inc., raises nothing in its Response beyond conjecture to suggest that these defendants are appropriately joined together. The court accepts counsel’s representation of good faith in attempting to litigate these cases. However, under the civil rules, in fairness to all involved, including the court, these cases should be litigated and defended in separate causes of action. Therefore, the court will dismiss without prejudice defendants 2 – 201. (Zierk, Marsha)
An anonymous commenter, who brought the news, also quoted John Adams, and this wisdom can serve as an epigraph to this site:
It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished. But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, “whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection,” and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever.
― John Adams
10/7/2012
Judge Leo Sorokin is tired of troll Marvin Cable’s lies, denies ex-parte discovery.
Fight © Trolls 
Like SJD I was bummed out by the unexpected windfall in FL but this motion has enlivened my spirits and am going to bed with a smile.
Read Document 19.
They never served him but some female who I can’t connect to him or his business.
She has her own business using that address.
yes, never served personally! The guy probably is unaware of all of this.
Misconduct? Why shouldn’t judges take notice if plaintiffs have misconduct?
Too busy with the continental congress to show up for court
Like how if a civilian doesn’t respond to a court they get hit with motions for a default, but when an attorney who should be held to the ten thousandth percent of knowing the rules and regulations and timeliness of court dates fails to show, it’s merely rescheduled. Seems fair.
It’s hard work to balance 40 copyright trolling cases and their attending duties with the rigors of a vicious smear campaign with Thomas Jefferson. Cut him some slack here.
I bet Sorokin wants to rip into Cable in open court rather than doing it in some order.
I distinctly recall Paul Giamatti’s portrayal of John Adams in the critically acclaimed HBO mini-series and he also wore a goofy little vest!
Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER severing all defendants but Doe 1 entered. Beneath the cloud of rhetoric, New Sensations, Inc., raises nothing in its Response beyond conjecture to suggest that these defendants are appropriately joined together. The court accepts counsel’s representation of good faith in attempting to litigate these cases. However, under the civil rules, in fairness to all involved, including the court, these cases should be litigated and defended in separate causes of action. Therefore, the court will dismiss without prejudice defendants 2 – 201
“It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished. But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, “whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection,” and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever.”
― John Adams
I bet Sorokin rescheduled the hearing because he wants to rip Cable a new one in person instead of issuing something via CM/ECF. Call me an optimist 🙂 As Dan Booth so eloquently (and hilariously) pointed out, Cable does not allege anything, but then asks for settlements and disobeys a judge’s order. Brilliant strategy using, of all things, Google Maps. I’ll be shocked as hell if Cable doesn’t get sanctioned for not showing up to a hearing on his own emergency motion.
Judge Young severs all does but #1 in his cases today. Poor Marvin’s cases are falling apart
Hello.
I am looking for some advice on an issue I am having.
About two months ago I received a letter from CEG telling me that my website (a television themed WordPress blog) had a copyrighted image on it that was owned by a company named AKM Images. They never sent me a cease and desist letter. When I received this letter I took down the image. They wanted a settlement of a couple hundred dollars in order to avoid taking the case to court. Since I have never put copyrighted material on my website I knew something was off. It turns out a couple months prior WordPress had a security hole that allowed unapproved users to access your server and upload files. At the same time my hosting service also had a security hole that I later found out about.
Needless to say a hacker took advantage of one or both of these security holes and uploaded images and other files to my server without my knowledge (one being the file that CEG claims I stole). These files were put into a random folder on my server that had no link to them anywhere on the website so I don’t know how anyone could have found them. The webpages that the image was on were also a totally different design from the rest of the webpage and had links to random websites that I had never heard of before.
I contacted CEG by phone (I know probably not the best idea) and explained the situation. I told them that my website was hacked and I deleted the images as soon as I found out about them. I did not admit any wrongdoing. They told me they would get back to me since they had to talk to their superior. They never did and I contacted them several other times and they never contacted me back. So I assumed they were dropping the case since I did nothing wrong and the hacker was responsible for the copyrighted materials. Yesterday I received a letter from a Marvin Cable law office in Massachusetts saying that he now wants $2,000.
I am wondering what I should do. I am unemployed so I have no money to pay the settlement even if I wanted to. I don’t want to pay the settlement anyway since I feel I did nothing wrong. I didn’t put the images on my website and I definitely didn’t receive any benefit off them since no one could have found them. Therefore I have the following questions:
1. Has CEG, AKM Images, or Marvin Cable law office ever been found uploading their own copyrighted material to websites in order to then turn around and sue the website? I believe that one or all of the above were responsible for the images being on my server. First I don’t know how anyone that was not involved could have found the image since there was no links from the website to this random folder. Second when I called CEG and brought up this possibility, he went into defensive mode and said things like it was ridiculous and his company would never have done that. In the words he used and the matter he said them in it was pretty obvious that he was hiding something. I don’t know if there is evidence of them doing this in the past. It would be helpful in either getting them to drop this ridiculous case or could be used if the case ever goes to court.
2. Do you think they will ever even bring the case to court? Looking on this site it seems like most of the time these cases never go to court. Plus I have no money so he wouldn’t be able to collect anything anyways. Do you think I should just ignore the letter since the case is unlikely to go anywhere or should I consider settling?
3. If this case would go to court, what defenses would I have since I didn’t put the images on the website?
Thank you for taking the time to read this lengthy comment. Any help would be appreciated. Once again thank you for your time.
Although Marvin Cable is “our” hapless little troll as he is involved in numerous porn cases in MA, we usually don’t cover web image trolls, and they are legion. Too little time, too much to write about, so I’m trying to stay focused on bittorent cases. But I have something for you: our brother-in-arms, extortionletterinfo.com deal mostly with image trolls, and I’m sure you will find understanding, empathy and good advice there.
To the best of my knowledge, CEG’s game is a number game: I’m not aware of a single case they brought to completion. Their “business model” is to scare as many as possible and reap the cabbage from those who succumbed to fear. So my take on this: don’t talk to them anymore. In a rare case they pursue you (which would cost them a lot, and what would they “recover”?) and serve with papers (official summons, not scary letters), you will have to answer in 21 day. Finding a lawyer is highly advisable in that case. Yet let’s tomorrow takes case of tomorrow’s troubles: the probability of they pursuing you beyond harassment is less than the probability to get killed in a road accident.
Thank you for your advice. I thought this was probably the case since my dealings with CEG seemed like they were trying to stall and hope I would be scared into settling. I will see if extortionletterinfo.com can help. Thanks again.
I cannot believe that Cable, like Meier, has crawled from the toilet down into the septic tank.