Prenda
Copyright trolls Prenda Law, Paul Duffy, and John Steele commence three lawsuits v. Paul Godfread, Alan Cooper and our community
Initially those lawsuits have been filed in state courts so loved by Prenda (St. Clair County IL, Cook County IL, and Miami-Dade FL), but were promptly removed to the federal level by the defense lawyers. So, now we have:
- Paul Duffy v. Paul Godfread, Alan Cooper and Does 1-10, ILND 13-cv-01569 — Jason Sweet and Erin Russell represent Paul and Alan.
- Prenda Law v. Paul Godfread, Alan Cooper and Does 1-10, ILSD 13-cv-00207 — Jason Sweet and Erin Russell represent Paul and Alan.
John Steele v. Paul Godfread, Alan Cooper and Does 1-10, (dismissed) FLSD 13-cv-20744 — Brad Patrick represents Paul and Alan.
Here is one of the complaints (the other two can be found in Jordan Rushie’s blog post):
Alan Cooper and his attorney Paul Godfread are the main targets, obviously because they brought some uncomfortable questions to the daylight. Stifling the criticism of Prenda’s actions is the second, but not a secondary goal.
Who are the Does 1-10? If you read through largely identical complaints, you’ll see the answer: us. Us: me, DieTrollDie, dozens of community members who spend our personal time and resources to keep public aware of the predatory practice known as “copyright trolling” — abusive lawsuits with a declared goal to stop online piracy, but in reality designed to coerce quick settlements from alleged file-sharers, guilty or not. This is achieved by leveraging the social stigma attached to pornography and by insane, disproportionate statutory fines meant to be applied to large, commercial-scale infringement. We have been diligently reporting on lawsuit abuses, and it is not a surprise that those who benefit from such abuses are eager to shut us down.
I will avoid commenting on these three cases for the time being; will restrict myself to only reporting facts. Anyone with half brain can see all the flaws and the real goals of these cases anyway (as well as the answer to the question: “Why are there three nearly identical lawsuits, not one?”). Feel free to discuss these lawsuits, but be aware that if discovery is granted, your identity will most likely be revealed to the plaintiffs (I cannot do anything about it), so don’t say what you would not say openly.
As for me, I stand by everything I wrote. Maybe the words I have chosen were overly emotional, but everything I said has been based on provable facts and good faith. In addition, I never tried to smuggle my opinions as facts.
This country is still a world leader in free speech, and I hope that the outcome of these lawsuits will only strengthen my and many others’ pride.
Updates
3/6/2013
At least one of the cases, John Steele v. Paul Godfread, Alan Cooper and Does 1-10, FLSD 13-cv-20744 was dismissed without prejudice by John Steele today.
3/7/2013
As DieTrollDie reports, WordPress has notified us that it received a ridiculously overreaching subpoena asking for all the blog visitors (not even posters, visitors!) since 1/1/2011. Note that the subpoena is issued from California and signed by Duffy in connection with St. Clair county case. This case was removed to the federal level.
3/8/2013
Happy International Woman’s day!
This is the email I received from WordPress this morning:
Hello,
Thank you, we’ve received your response and will take no further action on this subpoena until the judicial process is completed.
Thank you,
WordPress.com
Followups
- EFF announces its intention to fight the subpoena, and WordPress refuses to comply with this subpoena.
- EFF to represent bloggers against copyright troll.
- Answers are filed in the Prenda’s defamation lawsuits.
Coverage
- TechDirt:
- Prenda Law Sues Critics For Defamation by Mike Masnick.
- Prenda Law Issues Subpoena For IP Addresses Of Every Visitor To Critic Blogs For The Past Two Years by Mike Masnick.
- ArsTechnica:
- Trolling firm digs deeper hole with defamation suit against critics by Timothy Lee.
- Prenda Law wants IP address of every anti-troll blog reader by Joe Mullin.
- Slashdot:
- Salon: “Die, troll, die” goes to court by Andrew Leonard.
- BoingBoing: Copyright trolls facing legal sanctions for in-court fraud file defamation suits against identity theft victim and online critics by Cory Doctorow.
- DailyDot: Copyright trolls demand list of everyone who visited blogs by Kevin Collier.
- TorrentFreak: Copyright Trolls Order WordPress To Hand Over Critics’ IP Addresses by Andy.
- Linuxexpress (cz): Copyrightový troll chce po WordPressu adresy kritiků by Lukáš Jelínek.
- InfoSecurity: Copyright trolls will not go quietly.
- Philly Law Blog: Prenda Law, John Steele, and Paul Duffy file suit against Alan Cooper, his lawyer Paul Godfread, and anonymous John Does by Jordan Rushie.
- Copyrightclerk: Paul Duffy, John Steele, and Prenda Law strike the anti-troll community.
- TorrentLawyer: Prenda Law Inc. sues the anti-troll internet community by Rob Cashman.
- Legal Satyricon Alleged Copyright Troll Sues Critics by Jay Wolman.
- Popeheat: Prenda Law Researches Streisand Effect, Says “I Gotta Get Me Some Of That” by Ken White.
- Cheapass Fiction: Copyright Trolls Going Too Far by Aelius Blythe.
- niko[pik] (fr): Un organisme anti-piratage somme WordPress de fournir les adresses IP des visiteurs de sites opposants.
Fight © Trolls 
I would hope it would be hard to litigate these lawsuits from within a jail cell.
Hey John?
U mad bro?
Sounds like we’ve struck a nerve.
Oh dear. It seems as though Prenda Law is not aware of the Streisand effect.
who that lol?
Accessing the image URL gives up the name Barbra – the first thing which hit me was the titular individual who inspired the term “Streisand Effect”. Not a surprise though – I don’t think Steele is stupid enough to indefinitely leverage on Gibbs’ cries for pity.
The term “U mad bro?” definitely rings true here. Did Steele think that the stink of his campaign would last forever? Why didn’t he post on ArsTechnica’s article profiling his opponents? Too scared he’d lose in a forum of discussion where people don’t take too kindly to his bullshit?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Striesand_effect
Phrase coined by Mike Masnick of TechDirt.
Badum-tisch
Clearly appears to be a slapp suit. Only real purpose, imho, would be to intimidate. Steele and Duffy would qualify as public which would set a very high bar for liable. I doubt they really intend to litigate very long, not with their apparent fear of discovery. I assume the real purpose is to silence critic who they know fear having their identity disclosed.
Interesting that this new flavor of douchebaggery has an actual name. Also interesting is this wikipedia article, describing that 28 states have enacted anti-slapp laws. Illinois & Florida are included.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation#United_States
My guess would be:
1) distraction (from current on going litigation or sanction hearings)
2) Intimidation/etc (as alleged in this post)
3) Attempt to put a patina of legitimacy on their operating by pointing to the lawsuits and saying “SEE? WE ARE LEGIT WE STAND UP FOR OURSELVES!”
in no particular order. I imagine they will disappear before long, if discovery is granted or the lawsuits continue it would set a precedent of some pretty scary big-brother proportions that I doubt any court would be willing to grant. Plus, Pietz (among other defenders) easily wipe the floor with these turds whenever they actually meet in court.
Someone should remind them that discovery goes both ways, and some of those they targeted know exactly what is the most damaging to bring to light.
This is surprising and stunning even by Prenda’s standards and the drama of the last few years. Now we have Righthaven and Charles Carreon all rolled into one, and with the Carreon debacle fresh in the collective memory. I think if someone had joked about/predicted this development a week ago it would have seemed too crazy-speculative to take seriously. The Internet has not been kind to this sort of stunt and Prenda’s track record does not instill confidence that they will be the ones who succeed.
It seems like a serious stretch the way they are trying to connect Cooper and Godfread to posts here and elsewhere. About all they have in that regard is the fact that excerpts from the public records in Cooper v. Steele and Cooper’s declaration have been republished here. But I don’t believe there is any actual participation by Cooper or Godfread, unless maybe they think the Alan Cooper’s Ghost on Twitter is the real deal…
Tellingly, there are no clams by/regarding the Real Alan Cooper who founded AF and Ingenuity. Presumably, he has a dog in this fight and they would have significantly more substantial claims of their own were he only willing to join the fray and show once and for all that Godfread’s Alan Cooper is a phony.
I wonder if John really thought this was going to provoke a collective pants-shitting here and shut everyone up. He can always show up in court with a stack of the judgments he has won on the merits against the legions of people he has pissed off if he wants to show the world he’s not full of shit. Otherwise, these threats have no more teeth than the rest, just another attempt to outsmart the system.
No new case filings in months and this is the next big surprise? The last phase of the operation will be trying to shake down people who complained on the Internet? Then what? Sue the people who complain about that? Maybe Steele can find a way to piss off the whole world and then sue everyone in the world for complaining about it! Truly, the desperation in the air is so thick I can barely breathe.
Remember guys, there’s always the Prenda defense—There must be hundreds of John Steeles in this world!
Prenda associated activity has not stopped entirely. While it’s accurate to report that there have been few Prenda/Prenda-associated-plaintiff new troll filings since December 2012, there are some exceptions:
Pacific Century International Ltd. (Paul A. Duffy Attorney-at-law/Prenda Law-Illinois Northern District)
Feb 5, 2013 1:13-cv-00946
March 02, 2012 1:12-cv-01535
Pacific Century International Ltd. (Illinois Northern District-no attorney listed on RFC, presumably Duffy or associate)
February 14, 2012 1:12-cv-01057 (37 Does)
February 15, 2012 1:12-cv-01088
February 15, 2012 1:12-cv-01080
Pacific Century International Ltd. (Douglas M McIntyre-Texas Southern District)
March 06, 2012 4:12-cv-00698 (20 Does)
February 22, 2012 4:12-cv-00536
Hard Drive Productions, Inc.
March 02, 2012 1:12-cv-01532 (Paul A. Duffy – Attorney at Law-Illinois Northern District)
March 06, 2012 4:12-cv-00699 (Douglas M McIntyre-Texas Southern District; defendants: Does 1-59)
all those things you listed are from 2012. Before December 2012. We’re in 2013 now
Don’t mind me… I’m just going to forward this on to Ken over at PopeHat and wait.
I wonder if Steele included his posts where he said he was going to come after me…
why the three cases?
I don’t get it
Triplicate legal fees. If you think fighting one lawsuit is expensive, imagine fighting three.
Using far flung locations with different legal standards, trying to divide the resources that would be expended fighting these frivolous cases.
Notice they were filed as state cases originally, they were gaming the system once again.
Of course now one can wonder if the courts have jurisdiction over the targets who might be well outside of the courts reach as filed. Its like the mass Doe cases, where they all filed in the DC court because it let them and the court never considered if the targets were subject to that courts jurisdiction.
3 cases to pretend they don’t all work together in this.
Of course now this has me curious if this has anything to do with all my my wordpress notifications being gone…
Illinois and Florida have laws addressing Libel Tourism, though the main concern is deterring forum shopping in overseas courts:
“Libel tourism is a term…to describe forum shopping for libel suits.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel_tourism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_shopping
Streisand Effect ready to commence. Get popcorn everyone this one’s gonna be good.
On a side note could someone please pimpslap whoever scanned the pages upside down?
I don’t think they care about the Streisand Effect. They want hard cash and to tie the chosen ones in litigation for the next 2 – 3 years plus approximately 300k in legal fees (100k for each suit). It is easy to see the numbers involved. If they sue 14 people then that’s 1.4 million in damages each if they win.
If they succeed only on half of those then that’s 700k each. Multiply that by 3 suits then you are at 2.1million. Not bad. I don’t think that the 10 does is a hard number either. It could be more, could be less. People could lose everything over this, their houses, children’s future, all that they have worked for their entire lives – everything.
Will discovery be granted for names and addresses? Yes, almost definitely. They are clearly not only after those who operate the blogs, but also those who have commented. Well I guess this community is being put to the test.
In order to win a defamation claim, you have to prove that what has been said is true. If you cannot then they win. That is my understanding of the law anyway. I may be wrong. I must admit some of the things which have been written will be difficult to prove.
Good luck to those affected. It will be a fun one to watch that’s for sure.
Of course the first problem they face is the fact they had taken comments out of context to make them appear much worse. Creative editing is not allowed.
The second problem is people are allowed opinions, otherwise everyone who called the President a secret Muslim would be paying off debts.
This case has little merit and is mostly a tactic of lashing out trying to frighten people into silence.
Discovery will be entertaining as they refuse to remotely identify anyone, even those of us with established nyms as having said specific things. This really is… mean people called us names online, let us sue them for ruining our business!!! The comments are far less damaging than exposing the problems in their cases in these matters. This will end up being fun.
“How to prove libel
There are several ways a person must go about proving that libel has taken place. For example, in the United States, first, the person must prove that the statement was false. Second, the person must prove that the statement caused harm. Third, the person must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. These steps are for an ordinary citizen. For a celebrity or a public official, the person must prove the first three steps and that the statement was made with the intent to do harm or with reckless disregard for the truth. Usually specifically referred to as “proving malice”.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel#How_to_prove_libel
By following the above recipe, upon being sued by Prenda, or being dismissed from a case (assuming no settlement), how to file counterclaims for libel:
Step 1: File an affidavit stating that their IP violations are false. Attach documented proof, and note the refusal of offers of full discloser of computer equipment.
Step 2: Prove that public accusations of copyright violation and pornography have caused issues with employers and families. Not to mention the real direct cost of court fees.
Step 3: Show that IPP and the basis for the initial claim was technically weak, and not evidence that would hold up in an actual case, had it been brought to trial.
Step 4: ???
Step 5: Profit!
Thanks John Steele for the idea!
I eagerly perused the documents looking for one of my comments, and was *THRILLED* to see what I think were one or two of mine! I can’t be 100% sure, because they were older comments, and I’ve been lurking & poking for quite a while … but they sure sound like me!
If any court wants me to come down and read them for transcription, I’d be more than happy to. With special emphasis on the part about John Steele gargling balls for food. Even better would be to transcribe the comment about grandmas being shaken down for downloading “stop daddy, my ass is on fire”.
SJD – do you have any resources to ferret out comments on here? I want to make sure my badge of honor is accurate before I go off polishing it for the family 🙂
Also, if anybody gets a hold of the exhibits with the screenies, I’d love to see them.
I’d just like to note that each lawsuit starts off on a bad foot…
they dispute the claim they have ever fornicated.
While them being aged virgins would explain so much, I think we can easily dispute the claim they have never fornicated.
Now that I’ve gone back and dug up my full comments that our Friends at Prenda (R) cited in their lawsuits, I’m that much more eager to recite them for the record at the courthouse.
Ironically, the comments of mine that Prenda cited were mere snippets of longer comments that cut out the meat of the article I was commenting on.
Besides, along with “will gargle balls for food” and “stop daddy, my ass is on fire”, I would get to utter the words “plump anal pumpers” and “Prenda law – all bark, no bite” in a court of law. Just that thought will be giving me happy dreams for months to come.
I do realize that it will never happen … but hell … can’t a brother dream about being dragged into court by Prenda and being forced to rattle off porn titles for the judge? (the only way it could be better is if I had commented about Pulp Friction and Forrest Hump … just because)
No fear and much love, SJD!
I noticed this as well with some other comments. So, what do the screenshots they submitted look like? Do they show the full comment(s)? if so, are they betting on a judge not cross-referencing the comments to the screenshots and asking why they didn’t list the entire comment in the complaint?
Mr. Duffy appears to take umbrage at a pseudonym that has the word “Balls” in it. It’s an interesting way to stake the high road. Here’s the synopsis, for example, of the Heartbreaker/AF Holdings title alleged to be the infringement object in many Prenda cases, “Nina Mercedez: Popular Demand”:
“Synopsis
Her first double penetration!
Scene 1 – Nina Mercedez and Gina Lynn share a big c**k.
Scene 2 – Nina gets double penetrated by 2 big studs.
Scene 3 – Young nerd gets to f**k and c*m on her face.
Scene 4 – After all this f**king, get Nina alone in the shower.
Nina gives Eva Angelina an*l strap-on treatment.”
http://www.adultdvdempire.com/1581464/nina-mercedez-popular-demand-porn-movies.html
“writings may only be protected to the extent that they are original, and “inventions” must be truly inventive and not merely obvious improvements on existing knowledge**”
**Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause
Interesting that in the FL state complaint Steele refers to himself as “undersigned counsel” and requests an award of “attorneys’ fees” because I was not aware he was licensed to practice law in FL.
I was hoping someone who signed a doc swearing to never attempt to practice in FL would have filed that one…
Is an attorney representing himself still considered pro se? And if so, isn’t the awarding of attorney’s fees barred to pro se plaintiffs? Wait a minute…can a plaintiff proceed pro se in the first place?
I’m so confused. Now I know why I never wanted to be a lawyer.
yes, plaintiffs can proceed pro se, however they cannot be awarded attorney’s fees (unless they hire an attorney at some point during litigation). Still this one is tricky, Steele isn’t allowed to practice law yet he does, to my knowledge, have the right to represent himself. the question is:
does a lawyer acting as pro se count as practicing law?
Gee one of the “Anonymous” quotes they cite is from one of my pet posts…
You remember that story, where Prenda threatened to have the police come and seize the computer? Their agents were lying to people on the phone trying to hustle a settlement out of someone.
Is there a way to search for the posts that contain the quotes listed in the suit? I’m curious as to what the context of the post/conversation was when they were made.
GoogleFu
“portion of the quote” site:fightcopyrighttrolls.com or dietrolldie.com
Protip it appears the first half came from DTD and the 2nd portion came from FCT.
It would be interesting to look at how many judges are on record of making some of these same “libelous” allegations.
Funny how Prenda Law claims they are hurt by this open and free information exchange concerning their efforts. They were so hurt that on 1 Aug 12, they made a funny joke and emailed me directly an audio file of Mark Lutz ordering a pizza. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/81004257/LutzPizza1.JPG http://dl.dropbox.com/u/81004257/Pizza%20Order.wma As stated by SJD, I stand by what I wrote. It was done in good faith with the available information and facts. Their actions speak louder than words and they paint the picture I try to make available so others can make their own decisions.
DTD 🙂
This really is the most hilarious move yet–particularly for someone who has never wanted a trial to come to light. Does he really think everyone he shines a light on here will just pay and run like the small percentage of people he files on? This really will bring everything he doesn’t want looked at to light. Hell–I’m curious to see how he’s going to prove the numerous quotes he provides are false. I’m sure any court in the land would require a bit more evidence than “it’s not true because we say it isn’t!” Hansmeier, Cooper, the money machine, the copyrights–he’s going to have to prove all of those accusations aren’t true for this to work. That should be fun to watch!
I gotta go buy more popcorn!
As I understand it, in defamation claims the Defendants have to prove that what they have said is true. Not the other way round.
That’s British libel law– not American law.
Can anyone tell me how to use the PACER plugin? For the life of me I can’t find a tutorial out on “The Google”.
I am guessing you mean the RECAP plugin.
https://www.recapthelaw.org/
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” – Shakespeare
So what is his game? Identify as many people as possible and ask them for a settlement or be named and go to trial? That sounds kind of familiar.
Ohai Gang!
I’ve been chatting with Ken White of Popehat fame.
http://www.brownwhitelaw.com/attorneys/kwhite.html
He has graciously offered his help to those who would seek it.
And I Quote:
“For now, my offer is to try to connect people needing a defense with attorneys and entities willing to give it. Probably can’t take a pro bono client myself right now — very busy with existing ones. ”
A small sample of what the Popehat signal can do…
http://www.popehat.com/tag/popehat-signal/
You can contact him via the popehat.com website.
Understand that you can’t be anonymous with the lawyer, but they will be doing their best to keep Prenda, Duffy, Steele from getting your information.
Like we tell the Does, only you can make the decision that is correct for you.
I know many people will be loathe to, because they look at him as the enemy, but honestly anyone who has a comment listed in one of those complaints should be reaching out to Randazza – he is a superstar lawyer precisely because of cases like this, and shutting this type of thing down is what he lives for. Just MHO here – he is a really good resource, probably one of, if not the very best for precisely this kind of case.
Oh he’s evil, but he is good at what he does. I am not sure he is admitted to IL or FL, when his cases stopped – I stopped tracking him. I always said if it came down to it I’d try to get him to represent me… it would be fun to watch him deciding if I was the lesser evil or not.
Randazza is licensed in Florida where he was a professor of First Amendment law. Marc does defamation cases all over the country, too.
But am I the lesser evil this time? 😀
I have a dumb question.
How would they go about getting the information of the “does?” Subpoena wordpress to get the IP addy? Then subpoena the ISPs for the PII?
It just doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense…
WordPress has IP addresses (most likely) but email addresses for sure.
Then they could ask the court to then issue subpoenas for the ISPs… unless of course it was an end point on an VPN… and then it might be confusing.
Then consider the whole proxy issue, the open wifi, etc. Talk about a mess there, but then consider the rest. These cases will never reach discovery because Prenda’s statements will become public record. All of the phone calls. All of the letters. All of the comments Steele has allegedly made on various blogs. His interviews. His alleged statements on Twitter. Affidavits from those porn stars stating that Steele was the one who they shot the “scene” for (it was confirmed by the…guy). Other things that we’re not all privy to. Not to mention he’s putting himself out as an attorney licensed to practice in Florida, although he signed that affidavit stating that he would not practice law in Florida and if he does, it would be a Class 3 felony.
Exactly. Can’t wait. Get your counterclaims ready for immediate electronic court filings. These bastards are going down under the weight of their own hubris.
Nested reply hell…
I think they are hoping for counterclaims, it gives them a better chance at unmasking us evildoers.
You mean they’re baiting whomever the Does may be. Yeah I wouldn’t put it past them considering I wouldn’t put ANYTHING past them. For all I know, they’ve got surveillance on my home. They could easily do this too if they’ve got a list whittled down to 10 people but I don’t believe they’d ever stop at just taking pictures of me leaving my house, coming home, my dog taking a dump, etc.
More nested reply hell
@that anonymous dude, I doubt they are doing any watching. Have you seen their filings?
Make sure to keep a copy or send a copy of statements posted by Steele and crew on this, and DTD’s blog. Be sure to reference Prenda’s own form of litigation libel with their threat letters for settlement that like to include the. “PAY US OR WE NAME YOU!”
I created a file for every demand letter they sent me….it’s really fucking thick now and I labeled it “ASSHOLE SCUMBAG LAWYER” hehe. I’ve also made audio recordings of every voicemail Lutz or one of the lackeys has left for me. Also have one recording (not off my voicemail but someone else’s) of Lutz calling and not identifying himself, claiming to respresent Prenda, then trying to “settle” a case that’s been dismissed (they did that shit to me for over half a year after mine was dismissed). I also have one where Lutz refers to himself as Jeff Schultz.
This is a stupid question. I thought I used a VPN or ToR when posting comments. Would it be worth sending SJD an email asking what my IP was for some of my comments to make sure? Steele is creating fear on my part despite never being involved with any of his infringements suits. It pains me to think that something I say could be used against me in this fashion at some point in the future.
One thing I noticed in the reading of the suit that’s small, but shows how lazy they are. My understanding is that it’s been removed to federal court, so I don’t know that the jurisdiction problem is creates is relevant now or not, but on page 4 of the complaint, he says that jurisdiction is proper in Cook County because one of more of the defendants either reside in or committed these acts in St. Clair County. If you get to it before they amend, you can probably get a dismissal of that case for improper venue. They could re-file, but still, it’s work for them and money. Even in federal court, Cook County and St. Clair are different venues. IL ND for Cook and IL SD for St. Clair. Small thing, but still…
If I were a Doe, I’d take ILND, ILSD, or FLSD ANY DAY over Crook County (no explanation required) or St. Shithole, err, St. Clair County aka the toxic tort litigation capitol of the world (no offense to anyone who lives there, I’ve been there and…no, especially after seeing what the judges have done down there w/ respect to these cases). At least the judges in ILND, ILSD, and FLSD are familiar with the plaintiffs…VERY VERY familiar.
I live in Crook County and I totally agree. However the point was more simplistic. They screwed up their complaint. Badly. In a way that removes the courts theoretical jurisdiction. A MTD on those grounds, based on what was plead, should win almost automatically, if they don’t amend.
Illinois is one of numerous states that have enacted anti-SLAPP laws. The Illinois version is known as the Citizen Participation Act (CPA). The act provides relief when defendants’ conduct is “genuinely aimed at procuring favorable government action, result, or outcome”.
Troll-rebuffing blog comment-makers seek court judgements that quash the copyright trolling cases, and legislation protecting Doe rights. The Illinois anti-SLAPP statute clearly applies.
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/anti-slapp-law-illinois
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation
Hey you guys…. if you look at the suits on Pacer and check out the exhibits that are attached to the complaints…There are no screen shots! none! zip! zilch! zero!
Are they looking for the people who posted the comments in the exhibits or is there more comments ?
Are they suing just 10 people or people who posted certain comments on the site? Like the comments that are shown in document above thats it?
Skimming the filing they left the door open to add more people as needed. Think of this as one of their mass doe cases, we need more discovery so we can go after more people.
Good lord, the actions of a desperate man broadcast themselves from the rooftops.
That initial complaint is great. Full of ad hominems, defaming him in an actual complaint. Seriously could this be any more retarded? What is the point of this? There are some SERIOUS First Amendment issues here.
The Illinois Supreme Court recently narrowed the scope of 735 ILCS 110/35 to the point where the CPA is not applicable. This is, in my opinion, vexatious litigation at its finest, however IANAL. Besides, anyone subject to a suit may motion for immediate dismissal and no discovery may take place while the motion is pending.
From http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/anti-slapp-law-illinois:
“The Illinois Supreme Court has interpreted the CPA narrowly. According to the 2012 case Sandholm v. Kuecker, there are two scenarios in which the CPA does not provide relief:
1. If the defendant’s conduct was “not genuinely aimed at procuring favorable government action, result, or outcome,” the CPA does not apply. 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 110/15. This test focuses on the defendant’s conduct.
2. The second test looks at the plaintiff’s intent in bringing the lawsuit. According to the Illinois court in Sandholm, “if the plaintiff’s intent in bringing the suit is to recover damages for alleged defamation [or other intentional torts] and not to stifle or chill defendants’ rights of petition, speech, association, or participation in government,” the CPA does not apply. Later in the decision, the Illinois court summarized its ruling: “If a plaintiff’s complaint genuinely seeks redress for damages from defamation or other intentional torts and, thus, does not constitute a SLAPP . . . plaintiff’s suit would not be subject to dismissal under the [CPA].”
Uh huh, so, the question is, was this thought out before filed? I mean, thought out at all, one iota of thought that “Oh, shit, we’re gonna end up on the wrong end of a counter-action for an assload of torts if we filed a SLAPP suit against thousands of Does and the judge deems that it has no merit and is vexatious in nature.”
(Do not take the previous paragraph seriously as it is my own personal opinion which I am entitled to as I am not defaming anyone, simply exercising the right to free speech as afforded to me under the First Amendment)
I wonder what it takes to wear these trolls down? While I’m at it, I’m also wondering how out-of-territory advice may impact the parties offering it? I don’t wonder about my gratitude for this site, though.
More coverage of this – http://www.salon.com/2013/03/04/die_troll_die_goes_to_court/
Monday, Mar 4, 2013 10:50 AM MST
“Die, troll, die” goes to court
– Prenda Law specializes in online pornography copyright infringement. Why does that make the Internet so mad?
– By Andrew Leonard
Thank you for sweetening my day with the tears of a troll. I am happy now.
I urge potential Does in this case to get ready for litigation and get ready counterclaims immediately upon service so Prenda, et al cannot simply dismiss the suit. If we need to set up a fund, let’s do it! I have commented on this website with the words “troll” and “fraud” with respect to Steele and co. strictly as opinion, but I relish the opportunity to depose Steele, Duffy, the Hansmeiers, Dugas, Ruggiero, Gibbs, etc, on everything under the sun, which is now on the table with Duffy’s, Prenda’s and Steele’s suits. It would be a blessing to get all them under oath to testify on their practices, how they go about settlements, their “clients” who appear to have no Googleable history outside of copyright litigation, what online presences they’ve removed (e.g., BittorrentBull, BittorrentBetty, both Dugas’ LinkedIn profiles, etc.) and so on. Heck, with the complaints sexual history and drinking habits are on the table! These guys deserve to be taken to task, and if citizens need to force it so be it! Bring it on!
Of course, not forgetting Tappan and Mark Lutz. Lots of characters in this comedy of errors. Bring. It. On!
Exactly. Apparently these guys fail to appreciate that the reason they have suffered so few counterclaims is because they have been paper tigers, and while many Does talk smack online they are otherwise content to leave Prenda alone as long as that’s a two-way street (excepting the odd toothless letter or phone call).
With the chilling effects, harassment, First Amendment and SLAPP issues in these cases, you can be sure that if anyone is served with a complaint, the counterclaim will include not just annihilation of this garbage, but claims for all of the harassment and any misrepresentations that were made as part of the trolling phase of Penda’s harassment campaign, basically it will become a comprehensive counterclaim for harassment, and perhaps fraud if they made untrue statements in their dunning letters and calls or it was a case with registration problems. And there will be people like EFF, Public Citizen, ACLU, Marc Randazza, etc. lining up to get a piece of the action.
Litigation privilege and the corporate veil have been two of the dearest protections afforded to copyright trolls in their endeavors. By also filing the personal cases of Duffy and Steele v. Internets, the opportunities for discovery presented to those targeted are mind-boggling.
I really can’t say I’m stunned enough. Very curious to see how long these last, and I will be somewhat surprised if they stay on the docket for more than a few days. If they actually keep this up when they realize Godfread and Cooper didn’t just fold and beg for forgiveness, well, thing are about to get very awesome.
Worth noting, two of the complaints, those of Duffy and Prenda, were filed just days before the Morgan Pietz/Nick Ranallo double-teaming hit the docket in 2:12-cv-08333 (Gibbsmas) that presents evidence connecting Steele somehow or other to many of Prenda’s “clients.”
Click to access gov.uscourts.cacd.543744.52.0.pdf
Given what is documented there, it is certainly an awkward time for Prenda to double-down on defending their good name, but perhaps it is fair to say they did not see that one coming. Steele’s case, on the other hand, was filed about a week after Pietz’ bomb, so I guess he’s hoping nobody noticed?
Anyone else get the impression that this is a feint & run?
It just doesn’t make sense otherwise.
Well it’s nice to see John is an avid reader of the site. I am guessing it’s getting a little hot in the kitchen for him so he is out to get us all now. I wonder when the EFF is going to take up this case and volunteer to go up against Pretenda. I wonder if old John is worried that Gibbs will be giving testimony to a grand jury soon…
I’d be worried too If I was John, lord knows that Judge Wright is going to peel back the layers of the onion and get to the skinny of it. If you ask my opinion I think thi smells of desperation. The porn torrent lawsuit industry is circling the drain and now Judge Wright in on the case to expose some of the nastiness that has been stinking up the court dockets.
I dont think Steele likes that people are starting to get informed about what these torrent lawsuits are like and the methods they use to find infringers are being questioned. I might guess that maybe the settlement stream may be slowing down to a trickle now that people are googling “John Steele” “Prenda Law” and reading all about it.
Well there is always ambulance chasing, or class action law to extort – er – get settlement money. I dont see this getting to far, but I cant wait to see Allen Coopers response ( anyone know if it was
real Alan Cooper that got sued or was international man of mystery Alan Cooper that got sued)
aalong with the response from Godfread.
Maybe John isnt happy that he has Judges in two cases, in two different states wondering about Alan Cooper, and those questions are hitting home. I look forward to the anwsers to be honest, should make for a good chuckle.
But honestly this seems like a Hail Mary p[lay to try and keep the troll porn lawsuit biz alive and well
This is nothing more and nothing less than an attempt to stifle free speech. If Steele, Duffy and Prenda thought for a moment that intimidation would work they need to reread the blog titles: fightcopyrighttrolls and dietrolldie.
So now you can sue teh interwebz if it makes you cry? Woohoo! Ima jump right on that bandwagon! I kinda have to wonder at the wisdom of whoever thought this scam up. Since proving libel entails proving that these statements are false and injurious, any serious investigation will show that they’re truth, despite being flavored with emotion. There’s likely enough a smoking gun out there, which Prenda & Company just used on their own feet.
I was nervous when I first saw this pop up last night. However, a little education goes a long way and now I see this as a desperate measure by a cornered beast. Maybe they thought they could scare AC or Pietz into folding. Maybe they thought SJD and DTD would close up shop. I honestly think it was a matter of hubris and that they actually sat around downing G&T’s convincing themselves how amazingly clever they are in filing this suit. Had a good laugh, but now Ars Technica, TechDirt, and Salon are shining a bright light and it will not end well for them. They are desperate to avoid what is coming and this was a Hail Mary that is bound to blow up in their faces.
I have given these cats far too much of my own bandwidth over the past 24 hours. I’ve got more important things to do, but I am grateful for this site and the others like it, and am glad to be part of the erstwhile Bull’s downfall.
The actions reek of desperation. Reek is a horrible understatement. They simply do not know when to quit. Since the shit hit the fan with Gibbs in CA, our “friends” are now attempting to castrate the (extremely large and still growing) community that has managed to bring the operation to its knees and is damn near death (metaphorically speaking). The fact that “he” has whored himself out to the media whenever the opportunity presented itself does not help at all and actually destroys his libel claims since he has managed to turn himself into a public figure. If I were to write a post saying “I FUCKING HATE (insert public figure here) HE CAN BURN IN HELL! THAT CROOK!” would I be liable for libel? Nope. Not even close. Defamation? Nope. He has managed to wreck that claim as well. Then he has the gall to attach infringement onto the complaints…that takes BALLS.
This works… The interwebs shares with us answers to wishes…
grr https://soundcloud.com/pomdeterrific/pomdeter-call-me-a-hole
I wonder if the troll missed a date to file a reply to a motion, what will happen? Should I just wait for the court or file something to let the court know? Thanks in advance
Without knowing more…. Courts, especially federal courts, are pretty good at figuring things out. A “reply” (to an opposition) is generally optional unless otherwise ordered by the court, but they are usually filed. Remember, in federal court one has until 11:59 PM.
It was like reading a highlights of the best comments on here. Seriously, does Steele, Duffy, et. al. really believe a judge is going to take pity on them? Really? They’re just grandstanding and hoping to grab the brass ring before they get off (or in some cases, thrown off) this ride.