Michigan

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

    Found out that if you hit a reply for an earlier post it’s going to be hard to find it. Sorry for the repost.

    Doe 18 of 21,

    I am preparing to file a motion to quash now for one of the 6/14 cases.
    I do admire your work. Can you help with a few questions to file as pro se?

    For the motion, I don’t specify which IP. Am I right?
    Do I have to physically sign the motion or do the same thing as the Nicoletti did by typing “/s/ Paul …”?

    How did you mail the motion out to court and troll? A few conflicting ideas out there and not sure which one to use. Do I need certified mail?

    What did you fax to your ISP? You will receive any confirmation?

    BTW, what do you think that it’s going to happen to you? The troll had almost nothing against you even if they sue you individually.

    Anyway you are a pioneer and I thank you for that.

    • Doe 18 of 21 says:

      I was lucky enough to find an attorney that would file my motion for me electronically. Sign the motion with your Doe number. It should be on the notice you got from your ISP. I think you can also fax your motion, but I’m not sure. Like I said before, look at my motion to quash. The court notifies your ISP that there’s been a motion to quash.

  2. John Doe says:

    I know there was some issues with attorney’s in other states not filing a “Notice of Related Cases” and being sanctioned for it due to the amount of judicial time-wasting with multiple people presiding over same/similar cases and I’m wondering if Nicoletti is doing the same thing here. I’m a doe in one of his cases and I have yet to file a motion to quash/sever/etc. I may do so soon however just to delay them getting my information long enough that maybe some sort of backlash from the court system comes out in the mean time… Any news on any of his cases getting thrown out or other favorable outcomes for does in Michigan?

    • Raul says:

      Judges Tarnow sua sponte this year and Judge Steeh on motion last year have granted severances in the Eastern District. I expect more to follow suit as Nicoletti is really piling on the troll BS in this District.

  3. MIdoe says:

    Interesting, no one has viewed Doe 18 of 21’s motion using PACER before.

    Anyone filed a motion by themselves so far? Willing to help?

    • Raul says:

      Check out dietrolldie.com, he has the templates and DIY advice. Once you get started and have any questions post them there and here as there are lots of veterans who can assist.

      • MIdoe says:

        I didn’t see responses.

        Here is what I figured.

        You don’t have to specifically write your IP (or doe #) on your motion. The trolls will end up knowing the IPs who file motions anyway.

        There’s pretty much no way to do a delivery confirmation on these mails. So you just mail them and fax a copy to ISP. Since the troll will know which IP file the motion, and they know the city of the doe, no need to remail or anything. Just don’t write your name and address will be enough.

        Any comment?

  4. john doe says:

    Below is an interesting link to an interesting ruling out of Indiana for one of Nicoletti’s vs Doe cases. It seems that the judge agreed that the system was being used to extort does after contact information was handed over, so now there is a no-contact clause for his cases (or maybe all similar cases?) unless they plan to name individual does in a case and actually bring them to court.

    http://ia600605.us.archive.org/28/items/gov.uscourts.insd.40652/gov.uscourts.insd.40652.19.0.pdf

    Anyone thing that this information/ruling can be used in motions on behalf of does in MI?? I know he has several cases open here. Also it appears that none of them are marked as being associated cases on PACER which I’d be interested in finding out if that is true… If there are multiple cases with the same copyrighted work in the system then I believe that there is an obligation on behalf of the plaintiff to notify the court such that the cases can all be ruled on by an individual judge instead of have multiple judges trying to rule on the same exact things with different groups of does… I am a doe in one of the recent MI cases and am considering filing a motion to quash or sever pro se but I’m just trying to see if anyone out there has any insight given these recent updates out of Indiana.

  5. doe20_vs_MM says:

    Just received notice from Comcrap that Nicoletti is alive and well. MM vs, jdoes1-42 Nov 2 is the deadline

  6. jimmy_doe says:

    Me too. MM vs JDoes w/ Nicoletti Troll. I’d rather not get a lawyer – money’s tight. If it comes to getting a summons I will investigate the lawyer route seriously.

    Do you think we should be filing motions or just riding it out to see what happens?

    There is plenty of information on the cases up front, but very little I’m finding about what happens after the ISP subpoena deadline expires.

    Some questions:
    – how long does it take before the harassment starts?
    – is it inevitable i will be harassed? What is the “hit-rate” of people versus information given out
    – what is the eventual outcome? I’ve seen several people state they settled and regretted doing so as they didn’t research fully and panicked. Who out there ignored it and it was never taken further? Most, a few, etc?
    – what is the general success rate of filing motions in SE Michigan district? I did see one of the judges was realizing what was going on? What’s the current state of affairs here?

    Any info possible is greatly appreciated, on behalf of myself and all the people just starting to go through this here!

    Thanks

    • doe_30 says:

      yeah, i’m listed in case 2:12-cv-14105 with nov 2 deadline before comcast releases the information. From the info I have gathered, most people end up getting the standard harassment if their info is provided to the trolls. I haven’t heard much about people who settle from the blogs and what the settlement amounts are. I think if some of us do want to get a lawyer, we should get a common lawyer to represent all the Does. I still haven’t seen any major decision handed about the overall trolling situation from SE michigan. I plan on reviewing the documents once I get access to PACER.

      For my case, It’s interesting how the district judge Victoria A Roberts immediately granted the subpoena request from Nicoletti Trolls for this case. I reviewed some of the similar cases filed listing Malibu Media and Patrick Collins as plaintiffs on rfcexpress.com Some of the other cases are still bogged down and some seem to grant the subpoena after closer review. Nicoletti seems to be taking over from prior Collins cases that were presumed to be done.

      It seems some district judges from the Detroit branch are referring similar cases to magistrate judge Mona K. Majzoub. We will have to see how these cases go ahead with this referring judge. It seems that the courts are becoming aware of this copyright trolling issue.

      Obviously, despite you’ve committed the infringement or not, this type of lawsuits are quite out of control. Hopefully one of these judges will put an end to this.

      • doe12 says:

        After reading countless articles on this, from what I understand, they almost certainly will not file lawsuits on individuals after getting the info unless they have something more to go on. The issue is that if you are named but a child, spouse, neighbor, guest, etc is responsible, then they would have to re-file and serve the actual individual.

        Serving individuals costs too much money, which is why they batch them like this. The whole goal is to scare people into calling them to identify themselves, or to harass/scare people into settling once they get their personal info.

        As long as you don’t make yourself known by calling the troll, there is, IMO, a pretty small probability that anything will happen. Note that I’m not a lawyer and don’t play one on tv.

      • doe xx says:

        I have been given notice of same lawsuit. I did contact a copyright lawyer and he said it might be more cost effective to call a lawyer from EFF (after researching them of course), but really didn’t say which direction to go. He did mention that if the suit was in New Jersey it would be an out of area type of thing and he also said that it might be quashed but that doesn’t always work.. Anyone got info on this

        Has anyone else received this case?

        • doe_30 says:

          this case was filed in michigan, so it would be valid.. http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/michigan-eastern-district-court/105611/malibu-media-llc-v-john-does-1-42/summary/
          The mail is from NJ is because the comcast’s legal response center is in new jersey.. how much was your quote on legal fees? I think it may be reasonable for a bunch of us to find one lawyer.. i saw this attorney Eric Grimm that seems to have dealing with Nicoletti on his suits for Patrick Collins, Inc.

        • john doe xx says:

          I did not get a quote from the lawyer I talked to. Apparently he is one of the top copyright lawyers in Michigan and said his charges would probably be prohibitive.

          I still am not sure which way to go on this. There seems to be so much information pointing in all directions it is hard to decide, along with the added complication of all the legalese of which most I don’t understand exactly what is being said.

  7. SpanishDoe says:

    Anyone care to chime in on the slew of named Does in Michigan filed by Tappan? Fees are not paid in any of them. Just curious. Same thing in Illinois. Seems to all be by AF or Guava…

    • CTVic says:

      Tappan seems to be a proxy for butt-buddy Brett Gibbs. He filed a rash of cases back in August too. According to rfcexpress, he didn’t pay any filing fees for those buggers either. Can’t seem to find much of anything about Tappan or his history – other than he’s a nobody lawyer who used to work for a nobody company providing ‘business services’ making ~ 60k/yr. Starving lawyer.
      What’s interesting is that in his filings for both August & October, Tappan is listing his name and address in Troy, MI – but Brett Gibbs’ email address and phone number in San Francisco, CA.
      Maybe a realy-real legal type can chime in, but to my poor old layman’s eyes, submitting your name, but somebody else’s contact information to the court seems pretty damn fraudulent.

      If I had to wager a guess, Prenda found themselves another patsy, along with real-estate fraudster Nicoletti, to file “scare” cases to ‘incentivize’ more settlements. There’s no filing fees, so the cases are just going to be thrown out. Even if they were to pay fees, they’ve got nobodies handling the cases, so there’s a snowball’s chance in hell of anything actually happening.

  8. doe_30 says:

    Looks like Malibu Media’s first case is going for trial.. we’ll be looking out on the results of this to see where the rest of their cases go..

    http://torrentfreak.com/finally-bittorrent-piracy-evidence-to-be-tested-in-court-121008/

  9. Raul says:

    I left this interesting conundrum being faced by Judge Hluchaniuk over at the CEG discussion but as it is an MIED case, here it is again http://ia701505.us.archive.org/12/items/gov.uscourts.mied.270710/gov.uscourts.mied.270710.28.0.pdf

  10. doe_30 says:

    Finallly got my access to PACER.. looks like the last activity on the case is the case being assigned to judge Mona Majzoub.. i guess they’ll be waiting until comcast releases info to them before they proceed further… oh and fyi for those who are interested, the claimed infringement is related to X-Art ‘Morning Tryst’ video.

  11. Anonymous says:

    If you don’t fight back, the trolls will be on your rear end for months if not years (someone mentioned 3 years before they can’t sue you anymore). It’s a different story if you are willing to simply “feed the troll”. You probably would not be look at this website anyway if that’s your preference.

    If you fight back, they will not get your name immediately. They will most likely dismiss the case (for the Does they have the information already at least) before going to a trial. You face the chance of either being dismissed with others (so troll will never get your info) or being sued individually. The existing cases in MI hasn’t show what the trolls will do yet (Check doe 18 of 21’s case above). They cannot just easily dismiss all who fought since everybody will fight with them then. They are holding on to it with all the excuses. The worst case if the troll proceed with you, then you can spend your money with an attorney. This way you make sure the money you spend will lead to trolls’ expenses. Break their business model. It’s money they are after. Let them know that they are not getting it.

    It’s a personal choice. As long as you know what you are getting into and what you are willing to spend.

  12. SayNoToTroll says:

    Received Notice of Claim from Comcast. Nothing else. What will be the next steps. Can you share your process with me

  13. doe_30 says:

    Looks like Attorneys John Hermann and Elizabeth Downey fought back against Nicoletti on behalf of the does in his Patrick Collins case and obtained the motion to sever and quash.

    http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/michigan-eastern-district-court/100962/patrick-collins-inc-v-john-does-1-33/summary/

    • doe_30 says:

      I reviewed in detail Mr Hermann’s motion #10 from PACER and he seems to have put together a nice brief for the judge on what’s been happening and what other judges around the country are doing. I think I may opt to contact him for my case, if anyone of the other does are interested in doing so as well, it would be reasonable for us to join forces. Please post and we will make the motion to quash happen.

      • Anonymous says:

        I am one of the john does in this case and was thinking about contacting Mr. Hermann. There is not much time left to do so. Has anyone done anything yet with this case?

        I was thinking about just not doing anything but don’t know if that is wise? Any opinions?

        • BG says:

          I’m in the same boat as you. My deadline is fast approaching if I want to file a motion.

          Seems to be a 50/50 split – some file, some don’t. I’ve found a template I like and am strongly considering filing ‘Pro se’.

          We’ll see if I do or not. A couple of cases in Eastern Mich are getting motions granted – it’s probably worth doing. Having said that, if you’re just planning on ignoring all the harassment thats probably going to follow, and have a thick skin for that type of thing, ignoring may be the best option.

          I’m really on the fence.

  14. BiG says:

    Actually, given I have a little over a week left, I will probably prepare a draft and see how I feel nearer “deadline” day

    • John Doe xx says:

      I’ve looked at the motions to quash, etc. and they have so much complicated language in them, I think I would have a hard time making one correctly.

      Any idea how long it might take from contacting a lawyer and having him write one that can make a point that I did not download whatever they’re talking about, don’t have said movie on my computer, and do not know how they got my ip?

      Also, any thought on what a lawyer would cost at various points in the process?

  15. Anonymous says:

    I’d say you need at least 750 to get started with a lawyer. I had a good luck with lambert in the past

    • john doe xx says:

      I decided I’m gonna call lawyer Monday, to see what he says. I don’t like this unneeded aggravation from some scam artist trolls and would like it to go away.

      I won’t pay the troll. They can go to hell as far as I’m concerned. I’d rather give my money to a lawyer who will protect my rights.

      Also, can someone link to a motion to quash so I can review it?

      • Raul says:

        On the iPad so cannot link, just go to dietrolldie.com as DTD has a veritable arsenal of motions for your review.

        • John Doe_xx says:

          Has anyone submitted their own mtq and if so what kind of success did you have with the courts?

          Some of the motions I read looked pretty good.

  16. CTVic says:

    Wondering WTF happened to Jon Hone (Noj Enoh)? Last November, he was all gangbusters with a dozen or so multi-doe cases of the Frank Collins/Nucorp/Raw/K-Beech flavor, but since then he’s slashed and burned most of them, and apparently his torch has since been picked back up by real estate fraudster Nicoletti.
    Looking back at the cases, it looks like there was a hearing & disposition concerning most of the non-dismissed cases on 6/25/12. On 6/26 & 6/27 Honer started dismissing does en-masse in other cases. For a few, he moved to extend time to serve does, but seems to have backed out of the race. On 7/20, Nicoletti made an appearance to try to pick up the pieces, along with filing a slew of new ones.
    If anybody who has access to the records could dig up what exactly happened at that hearing on 6/25, I’m sure quite a few people would be interested in hearing about it.

    Case 2:11-cv-15222-BAF-PJK has minutes on the hearing.

    Several others show mass dismissals after the hearing:
    2:11-cv-15226-AC-LJM, 2:11-cv-15227-RHC-MKM, 2:11-cv-15232-DPH-MAR, 2:11-cv-15236-PDB-PJK, 4:11-cv-15237-MAG-MAR, 2:11-cv-15194-SJM-LJM etc…

  17. doe_30 says:

    looks like Nicoletti has a decent reply to one of the judge’s order to quash/sever defendants on this case: 4:12-cv-13309… basically he cites some of the cases where joinder was found to be proper and that with advancement of technology, courts should allow joinder to get proper infringement settlements. and also notes…. ‘ While the logical relationship test does not require it, should this matter go to trial, Plaintiff will prove that the Defendants’ infringement was committed through the same transaction or through a series of transactions with mathematical certainty by demonstrating,
    inter alia, that the algorithm used by BitTorrent Trackers would have caused the entire series of
    transactions to be different but for each of the Defendants’ infringements.. he ends with quote from Marbury vs Madison.. i will upload the actual pacer document if anyone is interested..

    • Anonymous says:

      Yeah Nicoletti also has pretty decent arguments in the following case 4:12-cv-12598 filed on 6/14 in MI eastern district. The doc filed on 10/24, he uses recent michigan case law to show that other judges have allowed this type of litigation to go forth and really making it look like michigan eastern district is fertile ground for trolling. The document also includes the magistrates ruling which sides with Nicoletti. I have to think that the friends at Lipscum are providing ample resources for Nicoletti to come up with such a clear response.

      This troll appears to be more dangerous than the Honemeister.. Remember Don’t talk to trolls directly.

  18. doe12 says:

    November 2nd has come and gone….I guess we may start hearing from the trolls next week. I recommend everyone meticulously document all contact they have with the trolls…I plan to install a recording device on my phone…

    • Anonymous says:

      Remember, you can get a google voice number and give isp that as contact number (if u do it before your info is released to troll). Might stop annoying phone calls.

  19. Anonisconfused! says:

    Hello, I have recently received a forwarded copyright infringement notice, I have not logged into the site they have provided me. The internet service is in my mothers name and they are demanding a Pre-settlement of an unknown amount because i have not logged into the site provided.

    1) From what I am gathering the best thing to do is completely ignore the threats until i receive a notice from my ISP they have been subpoenaed?

    2) What would be the recommendation if someone in the household admitted to downloading said file? (hypothetically of course) I have ceased and desisted and secured my wireless internet connection and the only mark on my isp’s logs is this one.

    3) Would paying the pre-settlement even render me not liable anymore or would it just open up a can of worms by revealing my actual identity to them and bring on a shit storm of harassment.

    If anyone can tell me how they have dealt with this and what has come of doing so, IE: Paying settlement or completely ignoring and what it has done for them that would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks again, A worried and confused anon :)

    • Anonymous says:

      I’d suggest talking to a attorney. If you are even considering paying the trolls, find your own lawyer first. Get a consultation. You can pretty much assume trolls are going to demand $2000 or more dollars. Why not pay an attorney $250 or maybe nothing at all, to tell you what your options are. Not only that, if do want to settle your attorney can probably get the number down and make sure all your paperwork is in order. I’m not suggesting you settle but I am saying if you are going to settle, get your own attorney to take care of things. Don’t rely on their website, their paperwork, because trolls cannot be trusted. They have no honor.

  20. Raul says:

    @Doe1of18 Still around? Your District Court may be the garlic to the troll vampirism.

  21. Doe 18 of 21 says:

    The court may be, but not my judge. Nicolletti was just granted another extension. I filed a motion to dismiss, but it’s not being heard until January. It’s been almost a year since they filed.

  22. Anonymous says:

    “My Paralegal did it” in 2:12-cv-12586-PJD-MJH.

    http://ia601505.us.archive.org/12/items/gov.uscourts.mied.270710/gov.uscourts.mied.270710.44.0.pdf

    “The Court should not dismiss John Doe 1 with prejudice because he is guilty of
    infringing Plaintiff’s copyrights.”

    Ok, so maybe its me, but how can Doe 1 be guilty when there hasn’t been a trial yet? Aren’t we all innocent until proven guilty? I know I’m probably being picky here…but for real?

    How can someone be legally guilty without a trial…?

  23. Doe 18 of 21 says:

    I would appreciate hearing from anyone that was involved and dismissed from 2:11-cv-15232 in the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division (Patrick Collins Inc vs. Does 1-21), Hon. Denise Page Hood presiding. I’m still fighting and would be interested in seeing copies or hearing recordings of any settlement letters or calls you may have received. For obvious reasons, I can’t leave my email here, but if you could post as a reply I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks

    • Doesydoe123 says:

      I have been named a Doe in the new Third Degree Case Vs does 1-72.
      To my knowledge, the accusation connected to my ip address is not on there.
      If Hood presided over your case and is dismissing this, why is she allowing this Nicolleti guy to make another case?
      The attorney I know suggested that I ignore it, like so many people have advised on this site, but I’m scared that while the accusation item is not there, that possibly a music file or some other item downloaded by someone within the ip address may be on the item history(I thought my router was protected, but I am starting to realize it may not have been at the time, which now has been fixed.)
      My question is, has anyone heard of after the 30 days instead of a settlement harassment coming, a summons automatically comes instead? I am scared because I personally know I didn’t do anything, but my question is if they dig into these ip’s deep and see a song was once downloaded on my ip address by an unknown, if it would be worth a settlement? I do not have enough money to fight this in court, and let alone this looks terrible for an innocent person being tied into something like this! A little help would be greatly appreciated, because I plan on ignoring this subphoena, because from what I have heard, Quashes do not always work, and either way they will have your information, but with a quash, it costs money that I do not have at this moment,

      Thanks for all the insights and look forward to hearing a reply quickly!

      • doecumb says:

        I cannot comment about this judge’s reasoning and history.

        The trolls could not issue summons automatically to every Doe in every case. There’s been about 300,000 Does-a fraction of one per cent have received summons. It would take an army of lawyers to track and argue 300,000 subpoenas. Probably many summons go to Does who the porn purveyor trolls viewed as good targets. Easier troll targets include Does who have given trolls extra information later used against the Does, or cases where a roommate tries to shift blame by accusing another.

        In the low probability situation, summons would served. Troll and Doe each would be allowed legal discovery. The trolls would be looking for evidence on the Doe’s personal computer of the work in question. If they get the Doe’s contact info, that’s all they want from the ISP. We know, of course, that the trials do not go forward. The troll just extorts a quick settlement and moves on. This outlines steps to trial:

        http://dietrolldie.com/newbie-noob-start-here/

        http://dietrolldie.com/2011/11/07/taken-from-the-files-of-“don’t-panic”-or-“what-can-i-expect”/

        As you say, a motion to quash (MTQ) is a more individual decision. But MTQ’s can be filed without a lawyer, as described at this site and others.

        You a didn’t infringe. Trolls usually stay in the threat stage, to make the most money in the least time. There’s no evidence here except an IP address association. If a lawyer is too expensive for you, there’s probably few or no assets a troll would want to go after. The troll scam is to raise fear in people. Information is one antidote, as you have read here. Over time, Does get perspective about the weak cases and immoral troll scheme.

        Disclaimer: This post is not to be construed as legal advice and is for discussion purposes only.

      • Re: Third Degree vs 1-72

        The law in my state is clear, no one can practice law without a license. Therefore everything posted here comes with a caveat – talk to a licensed and practicing attorney that you trust before you do anything. And make sure he or she is completely versed in internet law. With that said, I’ll post personal experiences about the kind of thing you are dealing with.

        From what I have learned, naming you as a “Doe” and naming you as “Mr. Doesydoe123″ are two different things. They are seeking out your identity, to change the name on the lawsuit from Doe to your actual name. If they receive permission from the court to do so, they will serve a subpoena upon your ISP to obtain your real name. Again, if the court allows them the ability to obtain your real name, they will then have the information they need to contact you.

        Assuming they get past those hurdles, and get your real name and location, you will then be subjected to phone calls, letters and emails all claiming the sky is falling. These communications will have deadlines, and the people on the other side of the phone will threaten the daylights out of you. You can even expect to be threatened with jail. It has happened.

        This is the equivalent of “Boo!” It is a technique that is used to scare people. The goal is to scare the person they are targeting, in an effort to get them to send money. The premise they use is to claim that they are relieving you of the enormous expense that a federal lawsuit will bring, and they act as though they are saving you tons of money by settling as quickly as possible. The important thing to know is that not all of these communications are authorized by the court and it is fair to say that there is no sky that is falling, or that it ever will.

        Lawyers who take these cases are called trolls. They are bottom feeding scum with no interest in your personal life or what kind of hardship they will cause you. All they want is your money, and the more people who pay them, the more they sue. You’ve gotten swept up in a multi-defendant lawsuit and they rely on scared people to pay their office rent. In some cases, they don’t even do that.

        In 2010, a notice of subpoena was sent to an ISP of a dear friend of mine. Being elderly, she knew nothing about what the letter meant. Later, she discovered that a lawyer had obtained her personal information from the ISP and the discovery came in the form of a scare letter. She went into a panic, just like you are right now.

        They hounded her mercilessly, demanding money she didn’t have – again, just like you. They had her convinced she was going to lose her computer, her rented home, and that she would be going to jail if she didn’t pay them thousands of dollars. What became of the letter? Nothing. Was she personally named in the sued or sued later? No. What happened when she stopped talking to them on the phone? Nothing, they just went away.

        Step One: Don’t talk to anyone about your case. If you get a phone call about it, tell them they have the wrong number and hang up. Say nothing, because they can and will use anything you say against you. If you even talk to them even for a moment, they will lie and claim you admitted you infringed. The less you say, the better off you are. Protect yourself, and say nothing.

        Step Two: Pay them nothing. The more people who pay, the more they will continue to sue. The sooner people ignore them, the sooner they will dry up and go away permanently.

        Step Three: Watch the progress of your case online constantly. See what is happening on the case and continue to monitor it diligently. Don’t let them have the upper hand by you being uninformed. If you don’t have a PACER account, sign up and get one. It is very cheap and has a wealth of information.

        Step Four: Keep further informed by reading this blog. You have no idea how valuable the information here has been to me. Two contributors, SJD and Raul, have spent countless hours meticulously posting here. Thank them for that – I know I sure do.

        Remember, only a lawyer can give legal advice. Talk to one, and do not take anything posted here as anything less than a discussion and opinions. It is meant to help you get viewpoints, but nothing else.

        Best of Luck

        • Doesydoe123 says:

          Well the name above is a name I made up for this site.

          If you look at the case, it clearly states that “if a mtq is filed, against this federal rule, you cannot file anonymously.” My point is, if you can’t afford a lawyer to file a mtq, then why do it? Either way, they are going to have your name.

          I’m praying that everything on this site is correct and the advice I got from an attorney pays out. Thanks rjd and everyone else that has put this entirely into perspective.

  24. JohnDoe_someone says:

    Just got a letter from WOW for a case 4:12-cv-14442. Anyone have any experience with the above mentioned attorneys, or what thier fees are?

  25. JohnDoe_someone says:

    I should mention it’s presided by Judge Gershwin A Drain.

    • JD_someonetoo says:

      i just got the same letter from WOW today. obviously, you’re not the one named in the case either. Are you panning to try to quash?

      • JohnDoe_someone says:

        Morgan Pietz just got sworn in in front of Judge Drain. I’ve decided to retain him as my legal counsel. He has a reasonable retainer(don’t know if I should disclose) but if you want to try and quash, it seems like he’s having success in getting the courts to question whether this stuff is legit.

        http://pietzlawfirm.com/

        • JD_someonetoo says:

          Thanks for the info. I found that the plaintiff filed a motion to quash the subpoena for discovery of identities associated with the non-party ip addresses on 1/7. The court date for hearing on the motion to quash is scheduled for 2/20. Has your attorney mentioned whether this means that WOW won’t submit to the subpoena before that point. I know the original date was in January. fyi, you can find somewhat updated documents associated with the case here:
          http://archive.org/details/gov.uscourts.mied.274202

        • Raul says:

          Pietz is one of the best, a true fighter.

  26. JohnDoe_someone says:

    Browsing the site more, I found this:
    http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com/2012/12/17/another-day-another-tantrum-but-this-time-brett-gibbs-directs-judges-to-this-site/

    More searching brought me to the Pietz Law website, and my case is linked there, should I try them first?

  27. innocentbystander says:

    Patrick Collins vs. Does 1-21 filed June 16th had an interesting development. The judge severed does 2-21, so in December the troll filed an amended complaint adding them back into the case. He’s issued a subpoena for doe 1. So far it appears to be slipping under the judges radar, or he’s found a loophole.

  28. innocentbystander says:

    Should be available. I have Firefox add on and downloaded amended
    complaint.

  29. Sprocket says:

    I was just served over the weekend for one of the AF Holdings LLC cases in MI. I’ve already made the call to lawyer up. I’m ready for this to be done and over with.

  30. Innocent Troll Victim says:

    Can someone tell me what this means (if it means anything at all)?

    NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Malibu Media LLC (Nicoletti, Paul) (Entered: 01/15/2013)

    It is on this case

    https://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/michigan-eastern-district-court/105611/malibu-media-llc-v-john-does-1-42/summary/

    of which I am one of the accused by the trolls.

    Also, if I sign up on rfcexpress can I view more ‘docket text’ than what is on the front page?

    Thank you

    • Anonymous says:

      You can get more info on your case here: http://archive.org/details/gov.uscourts.mied.273537

    • sharp as a marble says:

      set up a PACER (www.pacer.gov) account if you want to see more than what is archived on recap (you can be nice and d/l the recap plugin to archive whatever doc’s you buy) if you are under a certain cost threshold then PACER will wave your quarterly costs (creating a pacer account is free, you just pay a cost per page of the doc’s you d/l from them). following this/your case through there is/would be free. pacer is the way to go not rfcexpress, as far as accurate and up to date doc’s relating to your case.

    • CTVic says:

      Looks like 12 IP Addresses dismissed without prejudice. Could be anything. Duplicate names, people whose background checks came back as “not worth extorting”, businesses, politicians, names that ISPs couldn’t dig up, etc…

      Being dismissed without prejudice means that Jerk-oletti can turn around and try to sue them again if he pleases, so most likely they’re not settlements. Those usually come *with* prejudice.

      • CTVic says:

        … an interesting thing that came up in the archive pdfs for that case:
        https://ia701506.us.archive.org/7/items/gov.uscourts.mied.273537/gov.uscourts.mied.273537.5.0.pdf

        Magistrate Judge Mark Randon recused himself from the case last September … but the interesting thing is that it lists the defendant as “Sentinel Insurance Co.”
        Apparently one of the IPs pinged is Sentinel Insurance … ? And for some reason, Magistrate Randon thinks that would cause him to question his impartiality?

        • SJD says:

          Some judges are honest (albeit too much on the caution side IMO), some are Beryl Howell. I remember one case in CA where a judge has also recused herself from a Liberty Media Holdings (Randazza) case because… she had stock in Liberty Media (a huge company that has nothing to do with gay pornography). Also, A New Zealand judge comes to mind (one who was on the Megaupload case initially).

  31. Innocent Troll Victim says:

    Thanks for the info on my case. All the people are real helpful and it is much appreciated.

    https://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/michigan-eastern-district-court/105611/malibu-media-llc-v-john-does-1-42/summary/ 2:12-cv-14105

    I do have one more question (for now). Are there time frames for when certain parts of this nonsense suit has to happen or it will go away?

    Things such letter from troll demanding ransom, or notification that I’m being sued instead of my ip address?

    That last sentence sounds so stupid. Like the lyrics to a love song I heard, “I was taking out the trash, now I’m taking out you”.

    thank you

    • CTVic says:

      There’s going to be the time limit the judge set in the 1/16/13 order to serve defendants. Whatever that is … I wouldn’t be surprised if Nicoletti files another extension as that extension is about to expire … which will try the judge’s patience.
      If this case follows the common pattern, you’ll get letters & calls and threats up to and even after the case gets dismissed.
      IIRC, the statute of limitations on copyright is 3 years … so technically, plaintiff will have up to 3 years to try to sue anybody. Realistically, I wouldn’t hold my breath. All bark. No bite.

  32. WHY says:

    I’ve been in a Doe case with this Nicoletti guy since sept http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/michigan-eastern-district-court/97959/malibu-media-llc-v-john-does-1-43/summary/ I got a attorney immediately upon my initial subpoena to filter out harassment. After the information was released from my ISP the harassment came in. Referred the harassers to my lawyer and they stopped pretty quickly. Fast forward to last weekend I get a letter from Nicoletti’s office demanding a bunch of information about my network setup, family, property and internet habits. The letter demanding this information is absolutely ridiculous as it requests a reply within 10 days, but the letter was sent on Jan 25th and I got it yesterday which would have been the 10th day. In addition its labelled Malibu Media v. (My Name) which isn’t even a valid case. Anyways here is the body of the letter:

    “Your Internet Service Provider, (removed), identified you as the subscriber in control of IP Address (removed). This IP Address was detected infringing one or more of our clients copyrights as set fourth on the attached schedule of infringements.

    We are currently reviewing your matter for purposes of determining whether to pursue my clients claim of copyright infringement against you through further litigation. Included herewith is a form which allows you to convey to us any evidence which you believe make it less likely that you are the infringer. We respectfully request that you complete the form and return it to our office at the above address. Should you have any questions, you may call our office at 248-203-7800. Should you fail to return the form or call us within ten (10) days then we will assume you have no exculpatory evidence.

    Sincerely yours,

    Nicoletti & Associates, PLLC
    Paul J. Nicoletti, Esq.”

    Is this a joke? It’s obviously a lame scare tactic to get information out of court from john doe’s. There’s a lot of people still attached to this case any of you getting the same junk?

    • SJD says:

      Yes, it’s a mass campaign, not much different from last year campaigns by Prenda criminals — robocalls and “informal discovery request.” It’s more than a joke, it’s a trap, as uneducated victims may fill it out and send to the predators, and any answer can and will be used against the poor souls.

      Since you are represented, this message is a ground for your attorney to file a bar complaint.

      • ignoreeverythingdoe says:

        So what is the correct action to take here if one received such letter? what are the possible downside for ignoring the letter? Should it deem a response, what kind of reply would you suggest (call or send a letter back)?

        • SJD says:

          There is no downside of ignoring this letter, only upside. You don’t want to convey any information to trolls without attorney. Period.

          As for this particular fishing expedition, Prenda tried it before, and here is an attorney’s opinion (he is one of the best in the nation regarding fighting trolls).

        • WHY says:

          Pretty much like SJD said. This is a letter that is no different then a phishing email. They want you to answer these questions. Anyone with half a brain would NEVER supply information to a plaintiff. I sent this to my attorney who has already sent word to this troll months ago that I’m represented yet they still send me this? They really have some nerve. At the very least this Nicoletti guy needs to lose his right to be a lawyer. I’m surprised the bar hasn’t outed him yet.

    • The Tod says:

      Translation of letter:

      We currently don’t have any evidence on you, could you please give us some. We are also putting out feelers to see who we can get default judgments from.

      Sincerely,
      Troll

    • WHY says:

      On a side note how long do you guys think this case will remain opened? Nicoletti just submitted ANOTHER request to extend the case again. How long til Magistrate Judge Michael J. Hluchaniuk throws this out? He’s probably pretty sick of this guy already considering the amount of cases Nicoletti has submitted and constantly attempts to extend.

      • Tired_Doe says:

        How long? Your guess is as good as mine. This is my case

        http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/michigan-eastern-district-court/85765/nucorp-ltd-v-john-does-1-24/summary/

        Originally filed 11/29/11 and the last motion to extend was 1/3/13. I haven’t gotten anything after the notice from Comcast in Feb/12 and I have no idea what is going on with the case other than what is on rfcexpress.

        • WHY says:

          Wow I feel for you. Mine seems to be going thru motions to extend much quicker than yours. I’m assuming there is some type of cap on how many times you can extend a case on weak evidence.

        • anonymouseavenger says:

          They can drag out cases, appeal and retry them again until the statute of limitations is up. From what I gather from these sites that appears to be three years from the date of the alleged offense. Usually these trolls have a “time stamp” when they say the alleged infringement took place. That’s the date you work from when assessing the three year mark. Until then, they can prolong the case for a while.

  33. pissed Off Doe says:

    mm troll nicoletti filed more cases in MI, single doe cases. I wonder if its related to their massive please tell us letters? Does replied with motives, or they ignored and troll hopes for default?

    • WHY says:

      I don’t think its either. I think the single Doe cases are people that appear to have more evidence against them. Looks like they claiming certain IP addresses seeded said material for a very extended time which makes them “more” guilty. At the end of the day they still only have the IP logs and nothing more. They must feel they can get a return on investment by eating the 350$ filing fee with scaring the Doe by calling out their name. I don’t feel these new tactics are in any way attempting to actually take someone to court. I feel their goal is to still settle outside for a few grand. I think the trolls are starting to dig themselves into a hole. If they keep calling out every single Doe with a different case judges are all going to start getting really annoyed.

      That said as far as the trolls extortion business model I think their mass Doe suits actually return them more revenue then these single doe cases will. From what I have seen the Does cases with 20+ always seem to have a few people who settle. I think by them making these cases more personal Doe’s are more likely to retaliate with their own attorney and not settle.

  34. NotaDoe says:

    Not involed but very interested. A local business is being sued for a porn movie named “morning tryst” wich is available on pornhub.com. So how can this gang sue someone for a “movie” available for free? ttp://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=1868053409#!

    • Raul says:

      That’s nothing, in 2011 they were suing Does for movies which were copyrighted by another porn producer.

      • NotaDoe says:

        All I can say is wow. This is difficult to swallow. There are actual sitting judges who allow this racket to continue? What happened to our country?

        • Anonymous says:

          the problem is that judges do not have time to do any fact checking, and the way the courts in general are layed out their rules state that everything anyone says is automatically presumed as true. that’s how this garbage persists. if no one steps up to prove it is not true then they go on unchallenged, and if someone does step up they can dismiss the case without any repercussions again because of the way the courts rules are set up.

  35. Not a Doe says:

    I can see where this is heading. After reading the DMCA, which is the most useless work since “the da$h”, as well as various treaties and the like, I can conclude that a copyright owner who knowingly broadcasts works unencrypted or not otherwise protected has no cause to monitory remuneration, and in fact if said holder brings the matter to court shall be fined $500 per violation, half goes to the defendant and half to the treasury.
    With over 200 cases pouring in a day in my jurisdiction I can understand why a judge can’t see this, yet the army of useless clerks do have the time and it is their job.
    So with say, 2,000 of these fake cases the holder can be brought in and have to fork out a mil.
    Oh and I did not attend High School, nor hold any degree. What do they do, pass out J.D.’s to whomever has the cash???

    Oh and whoever is behind http://videos.womensforum.com/ is hacking your site, FYI.

    • NotaDoe says:

      Excuse my ignorance, it was a man-in-the-middle attack between my connection and your site. Guess I have made them aware of my existence. Good. Of course these sleezebags employ script-kiddies and are logging all IP’s of visitors to this site.
      Also be aware that there is a very funny trick being pulled, fake AT&T U-verse 3rd class mailers sent to “named” and suspected does. The phone number is an 877 that links to another bunch of scumbags trolling for more information to “get you”. AT&T legal has been notified.

  36. innocentbystander says:

    There were about a 9-10 Patrick Collins cases filed in Michigan by Nicoletti on Feb 7. Unfortunately f or him, the plaintiff was Malibu media. He had to amend the complaints. I’d comment on competency and professionalism, but I don’t feel like being sued today! :-)

  37. donotspamm says:

    Hi, I’m one of those who received a letter from Comcast recently naming the individual John Doe. Have read stories about these things in the past, but never thought it would happen to me. Keeping a level head and trying not to get upset or angry.

    From the wealth of info out there, I’m planning on contacting one of the following lawyers listed on EFF site.

    Steve Glista steve@rationallaw.com
    Eric Grimm ecgrimm@williamshugheslaw.com
    Raymond Harris raymond@raymondaharris.com
    John T. Hermann hermannlawoffices@comcast.net

    It appears John T. Hermann has already represented some John Does. Anyone in the same boat with cases in Eastern District of Michigan? What are your plans? From reading, it appears filing MTQ may not help much.

    • Innocent troll victim says:

      When I first got my notice from my IP I freaked out. Then after reading this site and others I decided to do nothing. It’s been about 5 months now and so far I haven’t received crap from them.
      I did get a google telephone number and changed my Internet account information to that number before the time ran out on the letter.
      I figure that if I get called now I’ll have some garbled mumbo jumbo message that I probably won’t be able to understand and won’t care about, and if I get a letter from them it means I probably have something neat to show my friends.
      I thought about calling Hermann, but decided I would wait until something actually happened where I would need a real lawyer.

      • Anonymous says:

        Hi Innocent Troll Victim,
        If it was 5 months ago and reading some of your other posts here, you are one of many Does in the case. So it is a little different. I checked last week and there were 8 or 9 individual Does of which I’m one of them. I also downloaded the expanded surveillance report of supposedly other infringements and I’m convinced they either made it up to pad the infringement to convince the judge or their surveillance is way off. There are numerous PC games in there which doesn’t make sense unless they assume most males are gamers or my wifi is hacked. I’m one of those who do not play any games whatsoever. Also a bunch of movies which I haven’t even heard off and some I have the DVD.

        Unfortunately to fight this would cost money and I don’t want to leave it to chance. Having this over your life and head even for a few days is already stressful enough, let alone thinking about it and constantly looking out for letters in the mail. I’ve contacted a lawyer and will see how it goes.

        • JD13600 says:

          Hi Anon,

          Do you happen to have a case# or just court and plaintiff if you want to keep it private. I assumed they did the expanded surveillance for 1 doe at a time, not during the multiple doe cases. Also if you don’t mind my asking what troll is on your case? I have friends in the new MM Colorado cases and with the expanded surveillance don’t know the going rate for settlement offers since they are leveraging multiple infringements plus “surveillance”.
          Any advice/insight you give is greatly appreciated.

    • WHY says:

      Hello Doe. My case is slightly different as seen above (group case), but the same thing applies. I’ve personally spoken with Hermann and really if you are tight on cash change your cell numbers and remove/change your home number to avoid harassment. As another option you can hire a lawyer to be your middleman. Basically when a lawyer represents you all the harassment and other garbage MUST go through them first legally. Remember whatever your ISP has on record is the contact information the troll will use.

      Its really up to you. What I can tell you is these cases stay open a very long time and motions to quash very rarely get OK’d. If you live in a family at your home I would suggest a lawyer just so they don’t have to deal with the nonsense at home. Pay them a one time fee to force the troll to send the spam their way and be done with it. If you are a single person and don’t mind changing your numbers or telling them off on the phone repeatably just ignore the garbage. That is all just my opinion I am not a lawyer just a Doe! Its still worth getting some advice from a real lawyer before making a decision on how you will handle your case.

  38. Donot Spamm says:

    It is with Malibu Media in the Eastern District of Michigan.

    I don’t know how much settlement is going to be with the expanded surveillance. As mentioned, the expanded surveillance is grossly wrong in my case. If it is true and accurate, then I can only make the following conclusion 1) malibu media surveillance is inaccurate 2) my wifi was hacked

  39. doggedt says:

    doing some research on IPP Limited and IPTracker v1.2.1 and ran across this article tagged – “Sharing, swarms and suing over porn” from Michigan Lawyers Weekly (subscription only)
    http://milawyersweekly.com/news/2012/01/13/sharing-swarms-and-suing-over-porn/. anyone have access to the entire article?

  40. donot spamm says:

    Hi WHY,
    I only have a cellphone (no home phone) and the number on file with Comcast is actually a defunct number. I never bother changing the number. So, technically Comcast has no way of contacting me other than by mail, or sending me e-mail to Comcast e-mail which I never check other than maybe once in a couple of months when I verify my e-bill.

    My name is also a pseudonym on file with Comcast though since I pay by credit card, my real name may be in the system. However, I checked with a lawyer and basically, they can amend the name at a later stage. So, if they are attempting to sue Bill Pullman at 123 ABC St, but it turns out, Richard Pullman lives there, they can amend the lawsuit. At least this is what I was told. So, it is still up to me to fight them on this.

    I’m trying to dig into my router logs as well, but unfortunately the logs are not there or have been purged. I do have 2 years worth of speedtest.net results. I rely on AppleTV and Netflix a lot as my source of entertainment, but a couple of times a week, my internet crawls to a stop and I do have speedtest.net logs to prove it. I’m suppose to get ~ 18Mbps at least, but sometimes, I only see 500kbps download. My only recourse is to reboot the router and things would go back to normal for a while and then it crawls again after some time. I was hoping to also get the logs of my router reboots to try to correlate perhaps someone hacked into my wireless causing my slowdown and I have to reboot. Of course these info are useless now but I feel I should be prepared and they may come in useful if I’m dragged into a trial.

    Looking at the expanded surveillance in my case, if Malibu Media didn’t just make it up, someone definitely hacked into my wifi. But somehow my believe is their surveillance is bullcrap. For a period of 8 months (on the IP that was assigned to me), I tested my speed on speedtest.net a total of 32 times. There are 15 times where my speed was as slow as 50kps to 4Mbps. My fastest speed is 25Mbps. And average around 18-20MBps. It is very obvious when I’m watching Netflix and I’m not getting the speed I’m suppose to get.

    • WHY says:

      See the thing with trolls are they are pretty good at scaring people outside of court, but they never go to court because they cannot win. The music industry spent millions in the courts during Napster and KaZaa days, but overall they did not win their lawsuits there. Why? Because an IP Address does not denote an individual. That being said I think the music industry didn’t really care if they won in court their main goal was to educate the population that pirating is bad. In those days I remember EVERYONE was downloading and no one thought it was wrong! Official news outlets released, “top ten songs to download” and Cnet even was the provider for the KaZaa and Napter clients! After the court cases the general public realized pirating is wrong and many stopped doing it. A lot of people took the hint and e-stores started up and they are the top revenue source for music. Is there still pirating? Yes, but people now morally know it is not correct.

      Now that said the porn industry, while in their hayday, were probably up there with the music industry in revenue, but by todays standards they have declined significantly. Today the only way porn makes money is subscriptions to websites OR DVD/Bluray sales. I have spoke with CEO’s of porn studios and they all agree the big money making in the porn arena is gone and it will never be the same because of internet downloading. However many of them agree that you can still make a pretty damn good living making porn.

      The troll cases I feel are a result of CEO’s who are bitter about the declining market for porn. If you were an owner of a business and demand for your product was at an all time high yet your sales are at an all time low because of pirating I think anyone of us here would be angry about it. Some of these individuals decided to use lawyers as a source of revenue and that is the situation currently. We all agree the methods being used are grossly wrong and copyright laws out of date. That said none of us can really do anything about the situation it is something I feel congress and the senate will tackle one day, but its going to be one hell of a wait because politicians are still arguing for CISPA right now which limits our freedom.

  41. Mr. Anonymous says:

    I saw in the most recent filing by Jonathan Tappan that he called fightcopyrighttrolls.com and dietrolldie.com pro-piracy sites. I have never seen any piracy promotion on either site, and in fact, I’ve seen both SJD and DTD comments saying that piracy is wrong. I wonder if there’s a lawyer who would be willing to take a libel case, since this looks like libel per se, saying that individuals or communities support illegal activities. Given the apparent number of underemployed lawyers in the US, I’d imagine there exists at least one, and maybe SJD and DTD could pursue that angle, especially if their anonymity is broken. I wonder if other attorneys have made similar statements in open court documents…

  42. JDoe says:

    I am a Doe in a case in MI. Recently the plaintiff attorney eventually learned the last of the Does’ contact information by what I can tell on PACER after having filed multiple motions to extend. Shortly thereafter they voluntarily dismissed most of the Does except for a handful. I understand the troll business model is to get the contact information to try to get settlements but why would they leave some does in the current case and dismiss all the others?

    • that anonymous coward says:

      They might have dismissed those that opted to settle.
      They might have dismissed those that made it clear they were ready to fight them in court.
      They might be using the dismissals to show activity on the case to continue to keep it open well past the rules that say they need to name parties in x time (3 4 months I forget) or close the case.

      • JDoe says:

        Well the dismissed people were dismissed WITHOUT prejudice, so I’m assuming that they can just file individual suits at a later date if they want to. The thing is that they were given extensions up until a certain date for which they had to serve/summon the Does, so my guess is that date now only applies to the handful of Does still involved in the case. If they want to sue those that were dismissed without prejudice at a later date they can file another case sometime in the future and thus bypass the current deadline to serve the Does that were all initially involved. But if I understand correctly they have a three year statute of limitations… Does this mean that they have three years from the time the initial complain was filed until they have to serve and individual doe at a later date or just three years until they file an individual case against one of the dismissed does in the future?

        • SJD says:

          Do you seriously believe that Prenda will file any new cases in the future?

        • Anonymous says:

          Don’t know if I seriously believe that Prenda will file new cases; but sometimes I do feel, irrationally of course, they will name/serve more people. Or that some other iteration of prenda will start going after people.

        • that anonymous coward says:

          What might be possible in some cases might no longer be an option for Prenda.
          I suggest watching the developments in Judge Wrights courtroom.

        • CTVic says:

          To answer your last question, the trolls have 3 years from the recorded date of infringement, not the date of filing the complaint. So if the infringement was recorded on Jan 2012, and the mass-doe suit was filed June 2012, the statute of limitations expires on Jan 2015.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      Why Trolls do things is often strange, but most likely it is a combination of trying to make themselves look good (attempt) and getting the last bit of money out of the most likely offender.

      The people left probably have more indicators than the other non- settling Does.

      DTD :)

      • CTVic says:

        … and a large part what they do is reaction to the complete clusterfuck of attempting to sue thousands of individual anonymous parties at one time.

        Everybody makes mistakes. People who lack attention to detail make more mistakes. Copyright Trolls who lack attention to detail and have to manage thousands of anonymous parties filing documents every which way make a METRIC FUCKTON of mistakes.

        Funny that the one detail they seldom miss is putting a name and phone number on the scare-call and scare-letter lists. Once that name is on the lists, there always seems to be several mistakes in taking them off again if those names have retained counsel, been dismissed, or even settled out of court.

    • MiJD says:

      I am in the same boat. I was dismissed (probably the same case) but some were left on. The strange thing is, I got a call the next day from one of their lawyers. He left a voicemail saying the same thing he’s said to me before. “We’re concerned that you haven’t contacted us yet, please retain council and have them contact us.”

      I don’t understand. I was dismissed. Is he threatening to file individually or does he just have so many of these that he didn’t realize I was dismissed already? If it’s the former, does this ever end? Or am I going to get these calls for months? What a pain.

  43. hank says:

    Dismissal in Ciccone case?
    http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.mied.274202/gov.uscourts.mied.274202.94.0.pdf

    Weird, I thought there was supposed to be a hearing…and that Prenda had nothing to do with this case…

  44. JohnD says:

    Lipscomb is really bombarding Eastern Michigan with individual Malibu Media lawsuits, 13 in the last 2 days on RFC.

    Any thoughts on these?

    • Anonymous says:

      Thoughts? Yeah, he’s a douche. He’s not giving up any time soon. One of these Does has to fight back, go to trial, and prove “Lipscum’s”evidence sucks, and win damages before he’ll quit. Even then he would just revise his tactics like he is doing in the current round. This is all opinion of course, but he’s nothing more than a common crook dressed up in a suit. You can polish a turd . . .

    • JDoe says:

      Interestingly, it looks as if all those new cases just filed are for IP addresses that AREN’T associated with previous cases from Malibu Media in Michigan…. I’d be interested in finding out whats happening with all those that were dismissed, or currently involved in, other Malibu Media cases (whether or not they’re getting the exculpatory information request letters, calls, etc) still?

      • Anon says:

        Hey JDoe,

        How did you find the ip’s for the newer cases already? I have been looking but could not find any of the recent ones.

        Thx

        • JDoe says:

          I was just looking at RFCexpress.com like JohnD said a few posts up. There was over a dozen single doe cases from Malibu Media and each says the IP address in the name of the case. I just googled the IP addresses on the listed cases and the only thing that comes back is the each single case (being filed within a day or two ago). None of the odler multi-doe cases come up in the google search

        • Anonymous says:

          Well, that might not mean much. Normally lawsuits don’t list the IPs in the name and not all the IPs would show under a Google search as being involved in a lawsuit.

  45. Innocent Troll Victim says:

    To JDoe.
    I received a isp letter last October about Malibu Media’s suit and to date I haven’t heard anything from anybody. On rfcexpress troll Nicoletti has asked for a couple extensions to give them time to “serve defendants” which the judge signed.

    I’ve also noticed that the troll has dismissed a few defendants.

    These trolls actions are just pitiful.

  46. Innocent Troll Victim says:

    Hi, Could someone please read this and tell me what it means? It appears this case has basically been dismissed. Am I correct or just not interpreting things correctly.

    http://ia701506.us.archive.org/7/items/gov.uscourts.mied.273537/gov.uscourts.mied.273537.34.0.pdf

    Thank you in advance. I am one of the victims these money grabbing trolls were hoping to extort.

  47. Raul says:

    Yes, if the judge adopts the R&R (highly likely), Does 6-33 and 39 will be dismissed without prejudice.

    • Innocent Troll Victim says:

      Thanks Raul.

      I know that when a case is dismissed without prejudice it means they can refile the suit at a later date.

      Since I assume they have my name and address, does it mean that if the case is dismissed by the court the troll can continue to try and find ‘evidence’ from the information they have on me?

      Doesn’t this amount to asking a judge to “extend time to serve defendants” without having to actually deal with the court and getting a judge mad at the troll.

      Thanks

  48. JohnD says:

    Western Michigan getting hit hard by Malibu, 12 individual cases on 5.13.13 on RFC for troll
    Paul J. Nicoletti (Lipscomb)

    • Anonymous says:

      If I’ve been named in an individual case, what’s the best thing to do? My ISP will turn over my info if I do nothing…

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