“IO Group v. Doe” case has been dismissed
Even though the defendant lives in Texas, he was initially sued in the Northern District of California (IO Group v. Does 1-19). This case was dismissed in March, partially because of the attorney Christina DiEdoardo’s excellent work. Unfortunately, this happened not before Sperlein was able to reap some ransoms thanks to EarthLink’s lack of respect to its own customers.
This defendant is no one else than Doe #4 who filed a motion to quash (via Counsel Christina DiEdoardo – an attorney from the EFF list) and maintained his innocence all the way through the process. Although eventually Sperlein learned his (or her) real name, the defendant managed to stay anonymous in court documents thanks to US District judge Susan Illston, so his name has not been dragged through dirt.
Since the defendant was dismissed from the first case without prejudice, Sperlein was able to pursue another case against him in his home state, Texas.
For those who don’t know, I’ve been staying anonymous mostly because I fear plaintiff’s Counsel ‘s selective prosecution. I reiterated this reason in all of my court filings. I did not look into the details of this particular case until now, but when I did, I was not surprised that a person who filed a motion to quash was selectively pursued. Just another proof that my decision was right. Just another example that Sperlein cowardly goes after those who dared to threaten the flow of dirty ransom money into his pockets.
So the case was dismissed without a fuzz, seems like rats are leaving the sinking ship of copyright trolling “business”.
It seems that Doe was never amused by Sperlein’s threats and behaved with dignity. From the Motion for Leave to Take Discovery (emphasis mine):
5. Plaintiff previously filed an action in the Northern District of California against Defendant DOE and eighteen other Defendants who had similarly infringed Plaintiff’s works. Through Court authorized early discovery, Plaintiff identified the account holder whose IP address was used to access the Internet and engage in the infringing activity. The account holder, identified by EarthLink as a resident of Austin, Texas, denies he is responsible for the infringing activity. He claims that someone resides in his home with him and had access to his Internet account. He also claims he made his wireless Internet connection available to his neighbors by failing to password protect his network. He refuses to provide information to help identify the infringer, and refuses to allow a computer forensics expert to examine his computer.
Indeed, why the hell should any sane person voluntarily allow his personal stuff to be searched? Why any self-respecting person should collaborate with an extortionist?
Note the troll attorney who helped Sperlein in this vindictive lawsuit:
JAMES O. DEEGEAR III Texas Bar No. 05713500
DEEGEAR & MATTHEWS, PLLC
5945 Broadway San Antonio, Texas 78209-5235
Telephone: (210) 930-5557 Telecopier: (210) 930-3607
Pingbacks & Trackbacks