Indiana

Trolls
Attorneys who defend troll victims
Relevant posts
Comments
  1. Morpheus says:

    All you have to do is follow the same format as the summons, The beginning is the same, then Just answer each paragraph with “defendant denies plantiff’s allegations blah blah blah” Then provide a long list of Affirmative Defenses, which is a long list of “doesn’t provide enough evidence to prove this and that.” Its easy to do……..and…….can save you $$.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Is there any idea about how many does have been served in Indiana?

  3. IndianaDoe says:

    And is there anybody who is named and still waiting for summon?

  4. morpheus says:

    Actually I just called the clerks office and there is not a fee for filing an answer to the summons. You can either mail it to them or go to the courthouse clerks office and submit it that way. You will need to mail a copy of the answer to the troll via certified mail etc.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Remember to include in your answer that plaintiff should pay all your costs involved should you prevail or the plaintiff back out. Keep kicking them while they are down in everyway we can. Counterclaim…

  6. trollsrbs says:

    I’m waiting to be served properly before I respond. I guess someone left paperwork on the porch over 2 weeks ago and has since to return. And nothing yet in the mail. It’s been over 30 days since the date on the summons.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Just be careful. They have been reckless so far and may try to be. If you see a request for a default call the clerk and let them know what you told us. Can’t default then.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Any attorneys in Indiana offering flat fee for handling these cases?

  9. IndianaDoe says:

    I think any attorneys that can handle civil cases can file an answer for you. So look for any attorneys that can offer a flat rate

    • Anonymous says:

      The new order (Nov, 29) looks like that court allow Plaintiff to communicate with Does freely.
      Is that correct?

    • IndianaDoeAnyone says:

      The new order (Nov, 29) looks like that court allow Plaintiff to communicate with Does directly.
      Is that correct?

  10. Anonymous says:

    Only if you are represented by an attorney.

  11. Angry Doe 00808 says:

    1:12-cv-00808 The man served in this case never responded and they filed a motion to default. What does that mean to the other does? Is it 150k total or 150 for each person in the case? Seems crazy that eveyone would get stuck without a voice.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Did any one answer summons on their own? If so, what happened(s) next? If you had a lawyer answer, what happened(s) next?

  13. IndianaDOE says:

    I just saw the case 1-23 the plaintiff require default judgement against several people. I am one of them. But I never received the summon nor did any of my roommate. Can anyone recommend some good attorney?
    Thanks

  14. pissed Off Doe says:

    Wow, looks like trolling is on the roll in IN. Check out 1:12-cv-00845-TWP. -MJD link here.

    http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/indiana-southern-district-court/98277/malibu-media-llc-v-john-does-1-29/summary/

    Trolls named pretty much all doe’s and now ask for defaults. I hope this backfires.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      I didn’t see a motion for default, plus another Doe has already filed an answer to the complaint. Will be interesting to see what this A$$hat is up to. If they get a default from one Doe, then the case is done for the Plaintiff. The defaulting party is then responsible for going after the others.

      DTD :)

      • pissed off Doe says:

        I misread the #103, damn smart phones. Is this a new tactics limbscums minions are trying? Swing for fences on one case, see the outcome? So if one Doe answers, they have no grounds asking for a default on the other Doe’s that ignore them? I really hope at least one of the Doe’s will counterclaim and force malibu to settle, its about hurting their bottom line.

        • sharp as a marble says:

          if they file for default then the 1 answering doe has justification to contest that filing as prejudicile because of the joint liability, unfortunately the judge will more than likely NOT kill the defaults suasponte even though one doe answered. however if they default on 1 jdoe then anyone else can file to end the case as ajucated on it’s merits because they are “jointly” liable, thus putting the weight of enforcement on the defaulted doe.

      • pissed off Doe says:

        There are 4 cases in IN, all filed by troll Nicoletti, and it looks like they named almost all Doe’s. All were named on 10/11/2012 in 4 different cases.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Did anyone find a good lawyer. I called Overhauser and they referred me elsewhere. Can’t get ahold of the lawyer they referred me to. Was served about 10 days ago, but work is killing me. Should I file for extension on my own?

    • Anonymous says:

      The following should not be construed as valid legal advice, as I am not a lawyer, and am not qulalified to give legal advice.

      Yes, you can file for an extension yourself. Just be sure to follow the same format as the original complaint, Make sure to include the courts specific name and jurisdiction at the top, plaintiffs and defendants on the left side below that, and the full case # on the right. Below that, title your request accordingly, along the lines of “Defendants Request for Extension of Time” or something like that, and below that, explain your reason for asking for the extension. Make sure you mention that you are repreenting yourself for the purpose of filing this request. That doesn’t lock you into defending yourself for the entire proceeding, dont worry. A request for an additiona 30 days should get approved, if it is your first request.

      After you explain your reason, in the next paragraph, be sure to state “WHEREFORE, defendant requests…….” and summarize your request. Sign, date, type name, addres, phone number, and email.

      Below all that, type “Certificate of Service”, and explain that you are mailing a copy of this entire request to the plaintiffs attorney on XX-XX-XXX date, and put his name and address. Sign and date, etc. again below all that.

      Print. Sign. Then make 3-4 copies. Then take the original document and copies to your courts clerks office, they will take the original, stamp it, then stamp all of your copies, to make them official. Mail one of these to the plaintiffs attorney the same day, if possible. Keep the other copies for your records. The court will rule on your request, and send you their response through mail, or you can call the clerks office to get the courts ruling faster.

      Good luck.

    • Raul says:

      I would recommend you contact Erin Russell who is already representing a defendant against Nicoletti in INSD. She offers a free initial consultation. Trolls hate her which is why we love her. http://www.russellfirmchicago.com/?page_id=16

  16. HoosierDoe says:

    Hmm. I’ve been served, but WAAAAAY after the deadline. Not sure what to make of that, unless I’m misunderstanding something.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Looks like Nicoletti dismissed a case yesterday. I’m not a lawyer and not sure how to use PACER….anyone know why this was dismissed?

    http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/indiana-southern-district-court/98274/malibu-media-llc-v-john-does-1-23/summary/

  18. Anonymous says:

    Doe 22 most likely settled. Only he is dismissed.

  19. Angry Doe 00808 says:

    Default motion denied in 1:12-cv-00808-JMS-DML. Do they just resubmit if he is not active duty? If he is active duty then what, on to Doe #2?

    Plaintiff’s Motion for Clerk’s Entry of Default, [dkt.
    19], is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE because
    Plaintiff has failed to include the affidavit required
    by the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, 50 USC
    Appx. § 521. If Plaintiff does not know the
    individual Defendant’s military status, it must
    consult the website the Department of Defense
    maintains so the public may comply with the Act.
    – JMS, DJ, 01/22/2013

  20. john doe #??? says:

    Well I got a call today… Had no idea I even got a letter from my ISP (I guess I should read my mail)
    I have found some info but not sure what to make of it. Any help on what you would do would be gratefully appreciated.

    Patrick Collins, Inc. v. John Does 1-16 case 12-cv-00370

    1/21/2013 9 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Patrick Collins Inc (Nicoletti, Paul) (Entered: 01/21/2013)
    1/21/2013 8 NOTICE by Patrick Collins Inc OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF JOHN DOE #2 ONLY (24.15.47.141) (Nicoletti, Paul) (Entered: 01/21/2013)
    1/9/2013 7 First MOTION for Extension of Time Within Which to Effectuate Service on John Doe Defendants by Plaintiff Patrick Collins Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order-IMPROPERLY SUBMITTED)(Nicoletti, Paul) Modified on 1/11/2013 (rmn). (Entered: 01/09/2013)
    10/16/2012 6 ORDER granting 3 Motion for Leave to Serve Third Party Subpoenas Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew P Rodovich on 10/16/12. (kjp) (Entered: 10/17/2012)
    9/11/2012 4 MEMORANDUM in Support of 3 MOTION for Leave to Serve Third Party Subpoenas Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference filed by Patrick Collins Inc. (rmn) (Entered: 09/12/2012)
    9/11/2012 3 MOTION for Leave to Serve Third Party Subpoenas Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference by Plaintiff Patrick Collins Inc. (rmn) (Entered: 09/12/2012)
    9/11/2012 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Patrick Collins Inc. (rmn) (Entered: 09/12/2012)
    9/11/2012 1 COMPLAINT-ACTION FOR DAMAGES FOR PROPERTY RIGHTS INFRINGMENT with JURY DEMAND against John Does 1-16 (Filing fee $ 350.00; Receipt #2004096), filed by Patrick Collins Inc. (Attachments: # 1 AO 121 Form, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(rmn) (Entered: 09/12/2012)

    Got a msg to call this attorney back saying that the case came across his desk today and I haven’t responded. And to call him back or have my representation call him back. I don’t plan on calling him back lol. And If there is a way to get rid of this without trying to settle I would as I have no reason to be worried about damaging my personal status. Anyway thanx in advance for any info you have!

  21. IndianaDoe says:

    Massive amount of new suits filed by Nicoletti in the past few days. Has anyone checked these out? Single doe with some new pieces attached to the claim. Point in case: 1:13-cv-00201-RLY-MJD MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. DOE, my recap hasn’t refreshed them otherwise I’d link the archives.

    http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/indiana-southern-district-court/289138/malibu-media-llc-v-john-doe/summary/

    There’s a massive non malibu media owned list of downloads, and a really odd “exculpatory evidence request”. Raul, DTD, SJD, any thoughts?

    • pissed off Doe says:

      Sounds like Trolls minions are tracking activity of the Doe’s IP address. I am pretty sure this is an invasion of privacy, If in the past, they were using their honeypot torrent files to get the seeders/leeches, I guess they went back for the second helping by monitoring all torrent activities from the ip address in question.

      • JoseDoe says:

        This reveals their essential stupidity. IPs are switched around all of the time by the ISPs. That is the reason that IPs are such weak evidence. If the Trolls think that they can monitor IP address 100.110.120.130 in one torrent for February, and say that the same address in March in a different torrent is the same person, they’re smoking dope.

    • Raul says:

      By my count Malibu Media has filed 46 individual lawsuits this month and they are more refined in several ways. First off, they are all being filed in traditionally troll friendly jurisdictions like COD, ILND and INSD (MD is an exception). Secondly, they are now including allegations of other infringements. This allegation is being made to avoid the problem that arose in the EDPA case where they were challenged on springing this on Does after the lawsuit had been joined as being outside the scope of expedited court approved discovery.. Previously they had always snooped on the IP addresses for other infringements but had only sprung this “evidence” when the Doe came to the bargaining table. Same shit, now repackaged to make it seem scarier. What is interesting it Prenda tried this strategy of carpet bombing the courts with individual lawsuits which I do not think has worked out for them. It remains to be seem how aggressively these lawsuits are pursued as it is an expensive proposition and Lipscomb’s research into the financial resources of its targets is just as poor as Prenda.

  22. Anony says:

    Looks like they are getting smarter and going after people who are sharing the files. They are connecting to the IP address and downloading all the files shared by said IP. Strangely this includes many files that are not their copyrighted material. They have downloaded “Atlas Shrugged”, some Playboy material and various other copyrighted works from these IPs. If someone else owns the copyright to these files they are downloading as “evidence” aren’t they guilty of copyright infringment themselves?

    Thoughts?

  23. Anonymous says:

    Then lets get the word out to all the owners of the copyrights they have infringed on. Let them know Malibu Media is using their copyrights for personal profit and basically handing them free statutory damage lawsuits on a silver platter. Notify all of them of this blatant infringment of their works.

  24. Greg Garrett says:

    My mother is one of the people who was named in the Malibu Media Case in the Southern District of Indiana. She was given an court summons today and was worried as to what will happen next. I know the judge involved and I have gone to law school. Please let me know if I should write a response to this summons for my mother. I have been to dietrolldie and I have seen a very good example of an answer to file. Before, I did file a motion to quash and dismiss, obviously it didn’t work. Please let me know what I should do next.

    • Anonandonandon says:

      Your mother has to respond to the summons, right? If you are a lawyer, I think you should defend her, especially since I assume she wasn’t the infringer (if infringement even happened). Fantalis did a number on Malibu Media trolls, filing counterclaims and ultimately forcing *them* into settlement. I would look into his pro se filings for guidance. Since you are uniquely in the position to defend your mother (even if pro hac vice), you will do your mother and a lot of other victims of this scam a favor by fighting. I would think alerting local media to the scam wouldn’t hurt either.

    • pissed off Doe says:

      x2 on the media alert, local News channels usually help with and warn others on scams like this ones. You can also do what DTD did(torpedo), sent an official notices to the Judges chambers informing of what is going on on other cases, especially the recent ruling by Judge Otis Wright on trolls, copyright claims and how bit torrent public IP address claims are bunch of BS.

  25. I am greatly pleased to report on the mandated telephone settlement conference we had this morning with Judge Mark J. Dinsmore in IN 12-cv-01680 Malibu Media, LLC v. John Does 1-5. He expressed concern with what he described as allegations of improper leverage being used by counsel in other cases against defendants, and specifically expressed concern for those defendants who are pro se. He made a point to say he had seen, at this point, absolutely no reason for these concerns being applicable to Mr. Nicolletti. The oversight Judge Dinsmore is exercising over settlement discussions in copyright cases of this type is greatly appreciated.

    To quote Judge Dinsmore in his clear and stern voice, summarizing his supervision of these cases: “I’m not going to put up with any improper conduct.”

    This is exactly what we need and I am glad to see it happening. I sincerely hope Judge Dinsmore’s colleagues in other districts across the country will follow his excellent example. The faith ordinary people have of our federal court system depends on it, especially of those innocent folks and families who have been shocked and are distraught being caught up in this dragnet.

  26. Anonymous says:

    can somebody tell me what should i do if the troll missed a due date to reply a motion? is there anything i should file to let the court know or should i just wait for the judge to notice that?
    thanks

    • DieTrollDie says:

      You can always mail or fax a memo to the court stating the details and that you are a Doe in this matter. If you are a single Doe, they will probably figure out it is you.

      DTD :)

  27. IndianaDoe says:

    I know people are busy watching the Prenda circus; thought I’d make a side note here that Nicoletti has filed a new batch of lawsuits in IN the past few days. Seems like more of the single doe, massive non-related download log style cases.

  28. Anonymous says:

    Nocoletti has filed motion for default against three defts in 00841.

  29. DoNothing says:

    It seems that Malibu launched so many suits in Indiana recently. Is this act apply to anywhere in the US or just several states: “More Likely True Than Not True”. Seems that 51% true VS. 49% not true is not so fair.
    Is this in favor of troll or defendants?

  30. Anonymous says:

    Malibu Media is going for trial in Indiana? There were new inputs in the RFC express showing the scheduling of pre-trial conferences for several cases.

    • Anonymous says:

      Yep and they denied attorney fees for a doe who they dismissed recently. They have free reign to harrass southern district indiana residents and the judges are encouraging the behavior… guilty until proven innocent in indiana. If MM says you did it you will pay… judge dumbsmore cares not for residents of indiana. Rights!? What rights!? You are all guilty by default for living in the wrong district.

  31. indoe99 says:

    Wonder what Nicoletti is trying to hide here??????

    MOTION for Emergency Hearing for the entry of an order setting an Emergency Telephonic Status Conference and enjoining Defendant from filing certain papers, filed by Plaintiff MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. (Nicoletti, Paul) (Entered: 05/16/2013)

  32. indoe99 says:

    another – in a different case but has same lawyer listed in both cases….CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:12-cv-00845-TWP-MJD

    MOTION for Emergency Hearing for the entry of an order setting an Emergency Telephonic Status Conference and enjoining Defendant from filing certain papers, filed by Plaintiff MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. (Nicoletti, Paul) (Entered: 05/16/2013)

  33. Anon says:

    Anyone have any updates they wanna share? All I can say is DO NOT SETTLE and stay strong throughout this process. It is kinda a mental game really, are you going to give into fear of the unknown or are you going to charge right up in its little punk face and say “bring it.”

  34. Indiana Doe says:

    I’m not comfortable with disclosing specifics, but I did not settle, and I did not pay a cent to the Trolls before being dismissed. It’s a heart-wrenching decision to make, because hiring legal council certainly isn’t cheap, and the many days of mental anguish trying to discern if I was making the right choices were taxing on my work, and marriage.

    I would pay $10000 to the “good guys” before dropping a single dollar to the morally repugnant Nicoletti and Malibu Media.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s