Not so serious

Properly respond to a demand letter — never hear from blackmailers again

At any given moment, tens of thousands share porn using bittorent.

Somewhere in Minnesota, a “forensic expert” spends sleepless nights in front of his monitor, tracking down evil porn pirates, writing IP addresses on a stained notepad with an obtuse pencil, and, opening a new box of Kleenex, carefully comparing downloaded flicks with master copies provided by pornographers, scene by scene, to make sure there is no mistake.

Given the faulty collection methods of such “experts” and their dontgiveafuckness about high collateral damage rate, it does not matter whether you are guilty or not: even if you never heard about bittorent, you are not immune to finding a scary letter in your mailbox one day. Wiping sweat from the forehead with a shaking palm, you, a “winner” of the “reverse lottery,” will learn about the prospects of selling your house, forgetting about your children’s education, and working years and years for free in order to pay $150,000 to the creators of the most useful of arts, low budget pornography.

But wait! The author of this letter, Joseph Perea¹, is not a douchebag, as and try portraying him! He is a Santa Claus, bringing a gift of relief in a form of small, almost nominal fee to make this nightmare to go away! Just pay $3,400 and this ordeal will turn into an educational story you will tell your grandchildren many years down the road, a story about a wise choice.

It is difficult to get rid of the following question though: what happens to you if you refuse to pay? As the letter suggests, a lawsuit will be commenced against you personally and you will lose, sell your house, work for free… Right?

Wrong! Given the history of Prenda Law (as well as any other troll), out of 300,000 targets, not a single person was found liable based on merits. All the “victories” either resulted from default judgments (when a person ignores court orders — not wise) or instances when a not litigation-savvy defendant incriminates himself by talking too much.

Yes, we know, there were individual lawsuits filed, but most of them went nowhere, and two even turned against the crooks. A defendant-turned-plaintiff in one of those two lawsuits, Liuxia Wong, not only managed to be left alone, but also received some money from the blackmailers. Recently Prenda attempted a new round of FUD, filing more than 50 “individual”² lawsuits in three states, but it was too late: the majority of targets, after spending a day on the Internet and understanding the anatomy of the scam, started openly laughing at the trolls and replying to the hollow threats properly:

Needless to say, the author of this response never heard from Prenda again.

Thanks to the author for making my (and, I hope, yours) day.

The document is mirrored here for those who can’t access Scribd.



Apparently I was overoptimistic: this gentleman has heard again from the crooks, which provoked an expected result. I simply fail to understand a masochist Steele, who keeps deliberately inviting pain into his ass.

¹Perea recently broke from Prenda to pursue a solo troll career Update: it’s just another dirty game: Perea still signs Prenda’s papers.
²All these cases are filed against a “Doe,” not a named individual.

wordpress counter


36 responses to ‘Properly respond to a demand letter — never hear from blackmailers again

  1. That was fantastic. I laughed harder at the end of the letter, then i had in a while. Serves him right! He told them right where to shove it, and i encourage everyone to do this.

  2. Once Prenda affiliate, Troll Goodhue, gets going with his CP Productions lawsuit in AZD I hope future AZ Does find this post and note:

    Mesa Police DepartmentOfficer
    M. Moore Badge No. 16889
    110 N. RobsonMesa, AZ 8520

    This is because any local officer will have jurisdiction to investigate a theft by extortion complaint as both the troll and his clients reside in AZ

  3. in some ways i wish i had not hired a lawyer to file a mtq for me, i miss out on all the fun of being harrassed. illegal robo calls, criminally liable extortion letters, counter claims, this soap opera is more fun to watch the mid day weekday television…..

  4. Hello All,

    Thank you sophisticatedjanedoe and a big hat tip to for you are the thrust behind my being able to ‘properly respond’. You see when I first received notice from my ISP, COX Communication’s third party legal consultant neustar in September 2011 about my IP address being included in a “MASS SUBPOENA”, I got to Googling. Dietrolldie was the first seriously creditable source of information on copyright trolls I found and you sophisticatedjanedoe was linked there. I’ve been following, enjoying and gettin’ educated from your very important, concise and influential work ever since!

    I am glad to be able to give a little somethin’ back and hope my small contribution helps someone. This is a prime example of what happens when sociopaths get law degrees. Thankfully God blessed this wonderful world with people like you, whom without many more people would become victims of these bottom feeding scumbag reprobates known as copyright trolls.

    Thanx again and keep up the good work . . .

    • Your letter made my day, thank you for the excellent example for all Does. AZ appears to be one feisty state and yet trolls are unrolling sleeping bags under bridges there. Greed must be truly blinding as common sense would dictate otherwise. Dumb fucks are not intrigued.

    • Been busy and meant to reply sooner. Great letter. To be a fly on the wall at Prenda when they got it. 🙂 I will add it to my site for people to see as one way they can respond.

      DTD 🙂

      • Thanx man. I hope my rationale can be adapted and used successfully for other does and I believe it can, but it’s very important to use proper verbiage, state facts, don’t make threats. They best way to cover your back IMO is to file a claim against the troll with the FBI Cyber Crimes Unit, and with your local police, that shows you’re serious.

        The letter I originally got from Paul Duffy was straight up extortion wrapped up in a pretty looking you’re the criminal package. I did not respond. I found you and sophisticatedjanedoe and when I received the supplementary demand letter from Perea I was ready to respond and I let ’em have it!

        Thanx DieTrollDie you have done a great service by exposing these copyrighttrolls for who and what they really are. Keep up the good work and have an exceptional day . . . Len..

  5. That letter is so utterly awesome, on so many levels, that I am speechless. I reread the last paragraph at least 10 times.

      • It would be just like the Troll of Cali to interpret a ‘friendly warning’ as a death threat, wouldn’t it? I hope you didn’t give him any ideas, ya know he’s geographically fairly close to me and I’m quite certain Sheriff Joe has a pair of pink underwear his size and a tent under a bridge where he would feel right at home . . .

  6. That Scribd document (“I am in receipt of your letter…”) is sweet! I believe that your “author” link is incorrect.

  7. I think I love the author of the AZ letter!

    FYI: Joseph Perea is still with Prenda as of 6/18/12. He’s the troll that signed the letter I received from Prenda.

      • Never assume honesty from these sleazy idiots, Prenda is evolving into some other kind of monstrosity, maybe mostly administrative, maybe mostly data mining , who knows? In any event, for liability reasons or for distancing reasons or something else prior Prenda attorneys are becoming independent contractors and Prenda is affiliating (franchising?) with other attorneys. Strange but always assume a sleazy rationale underneath the change in modus operandi.

  8. TxJen, you are going to need to explain your basis in belief that he’s still “with Prenda.” You look like you have a data point, but his official Florida Bar records say he is on his own. That’s not a trivial issue.

    • Brad,

      I believe Perea is still with Prenda due to the fact that the “settlement” letter we recieved on 6/08/12, on Prenda Law letterhead was signed by Joseph Perea. When I checked the Florida Bar, I did notice that his address and phone number are not the same as Prenda’s, I’m not sure what that means. But as of right now Joseph Perea / Prenda Law is the focus of my wrath!

      • Well if his signature is stamped on Prenda Law letterhead then he’s still associated with Prenda, however if you look at the cases where he’s the lead attorney, his address and contact info are wholly separate from Prenda (still within the same area though). Maybe they’re doing this for liability reasons since they may be expecting someone going after Prenda itself. It doesn’t really matter. Any idiot who’s taken a course in agency law knows that Prenda is liable for Perea’s actions if he goes beyond the scope of his employment or commits illegal activities on behalf of the principal (Prenda).

        • According to the docket of case 2012-5673-CA-01 in Miami-Dade the attorney record lists Perea and Prenda Law as the Plaintiff. Curiously though, the docket has an entry stating STIPULATION AND ORDER SUBSTITUTING COUNSEL on 06/07 which seems to indicate that Perea took over for someone? Does anybody know who filed that case?

    • Sunlust has replaced Prenda in the 1-120 does case in Fl with Perea. If that is the case why does Prenda keep calling and harassing people? Any update on the case as it stands now?

  9. Seriously though, what are the chances the law/courts would actually do ANYTHING regarding ARS 13.1804 regarding extortion versus the threat of being accused of a crime. Any reasonable individual would read the settlement letter as an extortion threat. But why is it that fact not being used and upheld? I can’t wait to get my extortion letter. You can bet I will be waiving it in the face of every regulating/law enforcement agency around and asking them if they are going to do ANYTHING about it. Maybe a youtube threat would get them to actually do something.

    On a different note, I have to comment on SB 1070 and the Supreme Court ruling for Arizona’s immigration law. Being an Arizonan, and dealing with illegal immigration issues regularly, I try to keep up on it. I found it rather interesting what the court approved and what they did not. I actually had thought the rulings would have been reversed from what they were. I guess a “papers please” environment is what we are striving for. In the end, really nothing has changed. Even if the cops do have reasonable suspicion to mandatorilly ask for immigration status, the cop is bound to hold the suspected illegal until Border Patrol responds, So, ultimately, the Feds still hold all the cards and can dictate what they want, and in the end will only serve to tie up local cops time even more without actually making any difference whatsoever regarding illegals. Because even if Border Patrol actually does show up to take the illegals off the cops hands, all that is going to happen is that the Border Patrol releases the illegals just as soon as the cop takes off, and if you doubt that then all I can say is that you better step away from the ganja. I have had personal experince with illegals and it has not been good. If you think that they are all wonderful and are just trying to better their situation then you are a dreamer and a fool. Our porous border is one of our nations great downfalls. Our President is granting amnesty to tens of thousands so he can win the Hispanic vote….talk about selling your country out. When I see a President so eager to sell his country out for his own gain it makes me very very nervous, especially regarding his stance on Copyright issues. I have a very strong suspicion he will side with pornographic Copyright trolling and trollers. The Porno Prez. I think his stance thus far has already shown that. So, the big question then is………

    Does an IP identify a person responsible?????????????

    Federal judges are saying no currently but I believe that is going to change. what I believe is that although an IP will not pinpoint a person who did the filesharing, it will isolate the household responsible for the filesharing with exemptions built in for public wifi establishments. I believe this will be the Prez’z stance and thus the stance of federeal judges. The current stance of an IP not identifying a person is just a flash in the pan I believe. I know some will disagree with me. All I can say is just watch how our Prez navigates himself to sell out the people of the US in order to gain his popularity with the deeper pockets. After all, elections are just right around the corner and he is looking to line his pockets with as many paying contributors as possible. Doubt me if you want. But do you actually think, even for just a second that our Prez actually cares about the American population, lol, seriously??? He will toss our collective asses under the bus so fast it will make your head spin.

    Sorry for the rant. I got in a mood. I think living in Arizona and having to put up with all the bullshit makes one see/feel how stupid things are at the federal level. Basically, I dont like bullshit and I dont like fancy talkin snake oil salesmen.

    • Well put Arizona. I am not at liberty to discuss your question on ARS 13-1804 as it may compromise the criminal case if and when the State decides to file. I will say this: As in any criminal prosecution acts and omissions of the perp and evidence is considered. One thing is for sure: Arizona Law Enforcement Agencies are very selective in what they pursue.

  10. Well it certainly is a sticky little mess that he may have gotten himself into. You would think a lawyer would know better, but then Ms. Cleo (the clairvoyant in case you don’t remember her) didn’t see her bankruptcy coming either.

    I also personally know someone through his personal affiliations has contacted Tony Farinaci at the local Phoenix office of the FBI Cyber Crimes unit so that makes at least two reports locally. Considering the grand scale of this ring I would think it would be hard for them to overlook the case.

    I think that whole gang of thieves would be well advised to be very careful with any of their communiques whether verbal, written or electronic as there is a very good chance they are under surveillance.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s