Prenda

Lightspeed Media v. John Doe: a must-read motion written by a real IP attorney

Despite the involvement of the Illinois Supreme Court, Ligtspeed Media Corporation v. Doe frivolous case is not dead yet. No doubt, Steele’s evil mind and Jones’s arrogant irrationality work around the clock to produce more sleaze to lubricate their way through the law. Yes, not even around, but brazenly through — thanks to one of the most corrupt judicial districts in the US!

Right before the IL Supreme Court poured a bucket of common sense onto the hot head of judge LeChien, Jason Sweet submitted a motion on behalf of one of the Does. Dan Booth and Jason Sweet don’t need an introduction if you follow copyright trolling cases. To those who don’t know, Booth Sweet LLC pioneered a class action lawsuit v. “fathers of US copyright trolls” Dunlap, Grubb and Weaver, and are currently litigating it rather successfully (yet painfully slowly — not their fault of course). In addition, they filed numerous motions in many courts, and those motions stand out as very thorough and convincing yet very easy to read even for a layperson.

So… Jason Sweet has appeared on the battlefield with his consolidated motion & memorandum to dismiss. I uploaded the motion yesterday linking it from the Lightspeed page, and readers immediately recognized its high value and strongly recommended writing a quick post in order to maximize the exposure. As one commenter said,

…The motion does a great job of addressing and debunking each and every claim in systematic fashion (almost surgical if you will). By bumping it up to its own post, it makes it easier for other Does and attorneys to find this great example that potentially affects 6500+ individuals.

Besides, if LeChien doesn’t dismiss the case or denies every upcoming MTQ next Friday, there are many references in this particular motion that could be incorporated into appeals to a higher court. It’s also a potential template for other Doe defendants to seek dismissal in the unlikely event they get named and served in their own jurisdictions.

I will refrain from analyzing this motion: first, it is well written and self-explanatory, and second, every detail is equally important, so I advise to read it in its entirety.

Obviously, this community contributed many ideas and facts to this motion, and we are happy about it. Hive intelligence of mostly non-lawyers, combined with sharpest legal minds, results in an undefeatable weapon against crooks.

Lightspeed’s goon and copyright troll Kevin T. Hoerner blatantly lied to the high court that we are a community of hackers. The following is obvious not only to any sane and independent person, but even to Prenda bozos: law-breakers would never secure such a wide, strong and sincere public support, as this site has been enjoying. Just imagine for a second a grassroots site “Copyright Trolls,” which has amassed 10,000 comments, 99.9% of which are supportive of Steele, Lightspeed and their noble quest against “pirates”, all without registration and moderation. I see you laugh: does anyone still have doubts regarding who is on the right side of history, and who will prevail soon?

wordpress counter

Discussion

28 responses to ‘Lightspeed Media v. John Doe: a must-read motion written by a real IP attorney

  1. There is a lot that is beyond great here. The not a “byte of evidence” as to the bogus breach of contract cause of action hit my funny bone, though.

    On the realistic side of things, LeChien has revealed himself as either (a) a dipshit, or (b) deeply indebted to the plaintiff’s bar (perhaps both). So some stupidity or some sleaze that could knock your socks off is not entirely out of the question. Holding my breath…

    • SJD,
      Before I turn in , Congrats on your 2 records this week! Bravo!

      With torches aflame and awareness high, trolls will never, ever once again obtain the upper hand. They are ultimately screwed.

    • I agree that there is not a shred of evidence in these cases. The problem is that LeChien is still allowing subpoenas to be sent to ISP subscribers (a new batch was just sent out — I know this because a bunch of Doe Defendants has just called our law office in the past few days).

      I don’t know how to say this more strongly. This case 1) has ZERO merit, and 2) it belongs in federal court (so we can rip it apart once and for all). That being said, it is unprofessional for Prenda to continue this line of extortion, especially considering the rulings against it calling their cases for what they are — a mass extortion scheme.

  2. i was telling a friend of mine about this and said that the only way that this motion could be denied is either by corruption or ineptitude (neither of wich you want in a judge), and he suggested if it is denied than we use this as proof of one and get a petition for a recall vote of lechein, the internet is more powerful of a community than many people realize, and once one judge gets recalled because of the internet community the others will have to sit up and take notice, yes judges we ARE infact watching you. with all the community activists on places like reddit it would not be too hard to get something going on.

  3. I just received a informal request of discovery from johnny. Really will they ever stop harassing me. Also, the package is asking I save my computer information and to let them know that I have done so. This is getting beyond stupid.

    • Is there any possibility that sending “informal discovery requests” and making it sound official could be in the same vein as Evan Stone’s sending out subpoenas as if they were court authorized? This seems very shady (and maybe illegal?), as anyone who has not had experience with legal matters before might actually fall for it and incriminate themselves unnecessarily.

  4. discovery is a 2 way street, so you should ask for info back regarding the pw you suposedly used, all security update loggs for their servers, “original” account owners name and contact info, their setting loggs for proxxy pass, the intrusion loggs showing a brute force intrusion, all financial data regarding bandwith costs and costs incurred by re-securring their servers, how many different ip’s were able to access their site with that password, exactly what files were suposedly dl’s by your IP, yada, yada, yada, a lawyer could give you a better list, you don’t need to comply with their discovery if they won’t comply with yours. that’s the joy of “informal”

    • If you’re actually sued and involved in a lawsuit, then yes, definitely ask for all these things. If not, I would stay with the safe route of just not responding to them.

  5. [sjd: restored from spam — false positives happen ~1 per 2 days. If you don’t see your comment immediately, shoot me an email, or wait: I check spam twice a day]

    informal discovery is generally only used in divorce cases, as steely used to be a divorce lawyer he is probably just taking a page out of that book. from dtd’s site:

    http://dietrolldie.com/2012/06/16/prenda-robo-calls-stupidity-gone-automatic/comment-page-1/#comment-3177

    Well a quick search came up an explanation of formal and informal discovery in divorce cases. http://www.clausen-hassan.com/law/discovery/ As John Steele ran a family law firm, this is fitting. I’m not sure how often “informal” discovery is used in other legal proceedings, but I did see some mention of it for a DUI case. I would assume it could be used in any legal proceeding. But if there is no case with you as a named defendant, I don’t see how they could do this. It sounds like they are just fishing for information from Does.

    Informal Discovery The second method of collecting information is “informal discovery” whereby the parties exchange financial information or other pertinent relevant information through oral request or simple correspondence. For example, tax returns, pension statements, or 401(k) plan statements can be provided via regular mail. The advantage of this process is that it is inexpensive compared to “formal discovery.” The disadvantage of such a process may be that if a party wants to hide information, they could attempt to do so by not providing this information. Therefore, whether or not to conduct formal or informal discovery is a very important decision and involves careful analysis on the part of both the client and the lawyer. Even if informal discovery is conducted, it is a good idea to obtain a “Sworn Statement of Assets and Liabilities” so that in the event that something is later discovered, this document can be used to show the Court that the asset, debt or income was not included in the Divorce Decree.

  6. I’d like to ask a few questions if that is alright.

    1. I recieved a letter in the mail last month (while I was on vacation) stating that I downloaded some pgraph video and that I had until such date (which was about to pass) to pay $3,400 to these people so my name wouldn’t be put on the defendants list. I didn’t pay them, was this the right move?

    2. I later then started recieving phone calls, from Chicago, and Florida stating that I didn’t pay and need to contact them immediatlely to pay and avoid being put on the defendants list. I didn’t answer or call them back, was this the right move as well?

    3. Now I recieved a letter a few days ago stating that I didn’t pay and that I need a lawyer to respond to them by 7/20/2012 to inform them of a settlement agreement or face a lawsuit. What should I do as it is 7/13/2012?

    Will I get sued? I live in Las Vegas, I was also in the hospital when the supposed downloading took place. What are my options? Should I be worried? I don’t have $3,400.

    Thank You.

    • So far you have done the right thing, and all without knowing it. The last thing you want to do is square off with them on the phone. If you do talk to them then simply say you did not do that and if they press it further they will have to file against you in your district (locale). It is not impossible that they would file a suit against you, just improbable. Remember, if you settle, it’s the same as admitting guilt. Once you do that they fuckin own your ass and will party in it any time they want.

    • The trolls always make the threat they are ”moving forward” with a lawsuit. They always set some random date following their demand. There is no “deadline” of the legal system at that date. It’s typical that after that date, the trolls call again saying that because they are “concerned”, they are extending the deadline (for an increased demand of money).

      You can tell them if they call NOT to call again. If you want to briefly say you didn’t do it, that’s OK. Please AVOID trying to discuss your innocence with the troll extortioner representatives. It won’t slow them and nothing good comes of it.

      (Keep records of the calls if you can. Keep their letters. )

      The troll lawyer group for Lightspeed Media has no track record of suit or local troll lawyer in your jurisdiction. The already very small possibility of being named is even smaller in your jurisdiction.

      The only porn purveyor plaintiff troll in your state so far has been Liberty Media Holdings LLC, represented by the troll lawyers Marc J. Randazza & James M. Devoy of Randazza Legal Group.
      Lightspeed Media has a different troll lawyer gang who have not filed in your jurisdiction & seem to have no representative there.

      If you were hospitalized at the time of the troll’s allegation, your evidence will be particularly strong. Any hospital stay will have an enormous paper trail, not to mention many witnesses.

      If in the very unlikely event the trolls did serve you with a subpoena, you could find help from a pro bono (free) legal clinic to answer their complaint. An answer to the troll charge with clear evidence of your hospitalization at the time would probably result in your being dismissed or a “summary judgement” on your behalf. It would be stupid, even for a troll, to go further.

      Disclaimer: Not to be construed as legal advice. For discussion only.

    • I completely agree with all of the previous replies. You’ve done the right thing. By ignoring them, you’ve given them absolutely zero ammunition on you. Trying to argue with an idiot like Mark Lutz would be like arguing with my pre-teen nephew…completely and utterly pointless and (unlike with my nephew) will only incriminate you more. They’re still fucking with me 7+ months post VOLUNTARY dismissal without prejudice. Phone calls 4 times/week “we’re suing you.” Yeah, ok. Again, I cannot stress this enough, DO NOT SETTLE. You may as well just say “yeah I did it.” They’ll own your ass after that. I just let the settlement date pass, laugh my ass off when they leave messages like “we’re extending your settlement date” then a day later “we’re suing you” then the next week it’s back to “the client was GENEROUS ENOUGH to extend your settlement date.”

      If you have a way to record their voicemails, do so. Use your phone, digital voice recorder, computer, whatever. Keep a file of the demand letters. I have about 49 recordings of Lutz et. al. on my little Sony digital voice recorder and a HUGE file of Prenda demand letters filed under “Asshole Lawyer.” One thing I disagree with is actually speaking to them to tell them to cease and desist. In my opinion (IANAL), it will paint a giant target on your back for more harassment and (possibly) an actual suit. I’ve considered hiring an attorney to draft a cease and desist letter, but the cons outweigh the pros (IMO).

      If they do actually file suit against you in which you are a named defendant (and that has about as much chance of happening as me…doing something completely un-fuckin-believable like having a 4-some with a bunch of models then getting a job with Goldman Sachs), your hospital records will be golden in court and you’ll have fantastic grounds for counter-suit against the porn company. The only named defendant as far as Prenda is concerned is Hard Drive Productions, which is Prenda’s client. Ironic, huh?

      My advice, don’t get all hot and bothered over this. I was scared shitless when I get that first notice from my ISP, then did some research, found this community, now I just laugh my ass off at how incompetent these clowns are. They obviously have no interest in litigating because they have no evidence. They’ve even admitted that 30% of the “owners” (subscribers) IPs are not the actual infringers but someone else who lives in the home, a visitor, neighbor, or a hacker. Open Wi-Fi is a perfectly good defense too, but not according to Steele (fuck his opinion).

      • The 30% estimate for error of allegation might be LOW. A troll representative has no incentive to overestimate the error.

        Whatever the number, it’s a big big number for something that improperly costs Does dozens of hours and thousands of dollars. If it were overcharging income tax, would even a 1% error rate be tolerated?

        The troll lawyer admission bypassed the supposed accuracy of the tracking system, which has never really been revealed let alone tested. It’s clear there’s profit arrangements with the troll attorney group and biases the supposed forensic group. No technology even when properly applied is 100%. And there’s no assurance of proper application here.

        • Oh I agree that 30% is most likely a troll’s low-ball estimate. It’s probably closer to 50% but who knows because they’re so secretive about how they procure these IP lists. My guess is they seed the damn thing on The Pirate Bay and just log all the IP addresses using uTorrent (freeware). Torrent trackers are known to throw out IPs that aren’t even in the swarm and there’s an interesting article about it on torrentfreak.com. When you look at the sheer volume of cases filed and settlements collected, ANY error rate is unacceptable and these trolls shouldn’t even be allowed discovery with a stated error rate of 30% (most certainly much much higher in reality).

          As far as troll arrangements go, I’ve read that Malibu Media collects 10% of all settlements so Prenda gets 90%…usually it’s more of a 1/3 thing. That is somewhat concerning that they’re willing to give up that much money. These porn purveyors likely have no idea what tactics their lawyers are using on people and how these lawyers are exposing them to liability. Just look at the latest case, Barker v. Patrick Collins Inc. et al alleging, among other things, civil RICO. That’s gonna cost those five porn purveyors a ton of money to defend against. These porn companies, assuming they’re run by halfway intelligent people, need to reassess their priorities because it’s not cost effective to collect small settlements then have to dump out God knows how much to defend a massive class action suit alleging some pretty egregious offenses. Either way, I’m no prophet but believe that the porn companies will end up going after the lawyers for bad faith and/or breach of fiduciary duty, attorneys will figure out how to pierce Prenda’s (and other troll LLCs, PCs, etc.) corporate veil and go after the lawyers individually, and it will be one big mess for any troll.

  7. From all the info posted about LeChien, I think it is safe to assume he is not going to dismiss the case, and so I hope the Doe takes it up the ladder to appeals. LeChien probably feels he is pretty safe from legal repurcussions because the entire State he operates in is overly corrupt. So, the bringing of attention to this case must be brought in from outside and spread nationally, such as this very site is doing. His corruptness needs to reeeeeeealy be brought out into the light of day for all to see. I hate to sound pessimistic, but there aint no way he is gonna dismiss the case, and even if he does it will be without prejudice.

    • It’s been over two weeks since the Illinois Supreme Court expressed interest in this case and vacated LeChien’s orders from 5/21 and on top of that, there’s this excellent motion to dismiss which thoroughly cuts through each claim of the suit, yet the case is still open. So I agree with you, the case will persist unless the Doe represented by Sweet or a group of does from the 7/20 MTQ hearings next week appeal (I’m going on the assumption that each and everyone of those MTQ’s will be denied) appeal to a higher court. It’s a big deal for a higher court to go against a lower court, yet it’s still open two weeks later. So I further agree that the St. Clair Co judge feels untouchable even when it comes to his own Supreme Court.

      On another note, it looks like there’s some activity on the Sekora front in Arizona.
      http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/docket/CivilCourtCases/caseSearch.asp
      Under case # enter in CV2012-053194 and hit search to see.

      The following link describes “CCA – Cert Compulsory Arbitration” in Maricopa County:
      http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/Arbitration/index.asp

      Best of luck, Mr Sekora!

      • ADR is pretty SOP, especially in California and apparently Arizona but the judge is likely just following guidelines because no one likes litigation. That being said, there’s no chance in hell that this case will be arbitrated; it’ll be bickered back and forth until it’s dismissed or Prenda actually grows a pair of balls and decides to litigate…which I will pay to see (literally I will fly out to Arizona and sit in the gallery during the spectacle).

        Good luck Mr. Sekora!

  8. So as a Comcast (then, not now) user who got the original letter and did nothing (thank you, everybod here) is there anything I need to do now? No contact has been made.

      • I also got the email from Yasha. Sounds like there are indications the case could have a positive (for us) conclusion very soon. Here’s hoping.

      • Looks like a new order has been entered into the register of action list for 11-L-683 (Lightspeed PW Hacking Case) in St Clair County yesterday (7/16). I wonder if this has to do with the Illinois Supreme Court vacating the previous order from 5/21 which now requires that AT&T et al’s MTQ must be heard (rather than being flat-out denied without a hearing like it was in mid-April when Buffy was bragging about it)

        http://www.circuitclerk.co.st-clair.il.us/Civil+Court+Records.htm

        Search case number by adding 11 for year, select L in the dropdown, then use 683 for the sequence.

        Hopefully some details will soon surface. I wonder if this has anything to do with what Mr. Heidari was talking about?

    • Wondering the same thing. It’s now been almost 2 and a half months since they’ve supposedly gotten my info, and I have yet to hear from them.

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