Florida state cases (Pure bill of discovery)

If you are looking for the information and discussion of the Lightspeed Media Corp v. Does 12-05673 CA 05, visit the Lightspeed password hacking cases page.

Florida has a little used and relatively archaic law on the books allowing a Complaint for Pure Bill of Discovery. You can read more about it here.

Trolls have been filing cases using this law to unmask Does by subpoena and extract settlements. Does who don’t settle or dispute may then be referred out to other trolls for actual lawsuit. Jurisdiction and joinder have so far been a non-issue and Florida does not yet seem to mind that their discovery law is being used as a fishing expedition. You can review a motion that outlines the Steele fIrm’s argument for use of this law and issuance of subpoenas here.

Additionally, in some cases the the usual Plaintiffs (Patrick Collins, K-Beech, Third Degree, Raw Films, Diabolic, Nucorp. Berlin Media and Zero Tolerance) are joined together against hundreds of Does for what can only be multiple different works and swarms. I don’t see how this can possibly be proper and only serves to deny the court the filing fees it is due.

Sooner or later, and I hope sooner, someone in Florida (I’m looking at you, State Bar and Attorney General) will take notice of this practice. I am also hoping that the trolls eventually name a state Doe in Federal court so that a Federal judge will take note of what Florida is doing regarding subject matter over which they clearly have no jurisdiction.

The whole thing stinks and is riddled with what appear to be egregious abuses, but that’s nothing new.

Doette, 12/07/11

Another interesting read regarding the specifics of Florida cases: The Latest in Nationwide Internet User Identification – Part 1 (The Ancient State Law “Pure Bill of Discovery”)

A good 2004 article in the The Florida Bar Journal: The Complaint for a Pure Bill of Discovery & mdash; A Living, Breathing, Modern Day Dinosaur? by Daniel Morman.

Obtaining court documents

Unfortunately, unlike federal court system, state/county courts make it a hassle and prohibitively expensive to obtain court documents. I bet trolls love this aspect.

Our online docket for case information is available at
http://www.miami-dadeclerk.com/home.asp click on Civil/Probate Records

At this time we do not accept case filings via email.

Copies of documents in the file can be obtained:

in person – at our office in the Dade County Courthouse – 73 W. Flagler Street – Room 133 – Monday thru Friday 9:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.

by mail – our correspondence section handles all copy orders by mail. We do not take copy requests via e-mail. Fees are $1.00 per page and $2.00 to certify a document. You can contact the Correspondence unit at 305-349-7464 for information on the number of pages. The mailing address is Clerk of Courts – Correspondence Unit – 73 W. Flagler St., Room 137, Miami, Fl 33130. Please send a self addressed stamped envelope along with your request.

Update from a Doe:

Here’s an updated number for the Miami-Dade Clerk Correspondence Dept.: 305 349-7451. Took a lot of detective work to get it. This is the only number I was able to reach a human. The one provided in a previous comment is never picked up. The process of obtaining court docs is incredibly slow and expensive (snail mail request & delivery / $1 per page). I couldn’t even get a local attorney to sell me a copy.

Blog posts

There are couple of posts about Lightspeed cases: consider reading comments: tons of insight.

Cases

Per community request, I started adding separate pages per case. The idea is to unite Does and hopefully share legal expenses. If you want a page for a specific case added, do not hesitate to email me.

wordpress counter

Discussion

732 responses to ‘Florida state cases (Pure bill of discovery)

  1. Thanks Richard I will seriously consider it… One other question I’m wondering- Does the link on EFF have any sort of bearing on anything that’s going on with these particular cases in Florida (specifically the 12-05673 CA 05)?

    https://www.eff.org/press/releases/eff-backs-isps-battle-quash-copyright-troll-subpoenas

    Is it possible these could get thrown out before anything gets released/etc?

    Is there any sort of cut off/deadline to consider with contacting an Attorney/legal advice? I’d gotten until towards the end of April in my instance for the motion to quash and if it could go away without having to leave a dollar from my pocket or having to lift another finger that would be ideal…

    • The EFF’s amicus brief was submitted to a Federal civil court, rather than a state court like Miami-Dade county. Of course, the mass copyright cases are shaky both legally and morally in any court.

      It’s hard to know how much and how quickly a Federal ruling against trolling would influence state court decisions. Mr. Viscasillas and others have more local knowledge.

      This is for discussion purposes only and is not legal advice.

  2. To all Does that have been notified of possible release of information form their ISP’s. If this is a Florida case specifically Miami-dade county, you need to file a MTQ, not anonymously but via an attorney. I was just dismissed from the Lightspeed case that was filed in Oct. and the only action I took was to retain an attorney and have him file the MTQ along with sending a letter to the troll explaining that they have no case. Once this was done I was promptly dismissed. I retained Mr. Manners. He wrote an excellent MTQ that was very specific to my situation. I would much rather give a $1000 to an honest attorney than give a dime to these bloodsuckers.

    I hope this helps. I can sleep now!

    Here is his contact information:

    Jeffrey P. Manners, P.A.
    lawmanners@aol.com
    Kendall Oaks Professional Center
    11120 N. Kendall Drive, Suite 200
    Miami, Florida 33176
    W: 305-596-1056
    Fax: 305-273-1008
    Cell: 305-773-8134

  3. Also a Doe in Case No.: 12-01794 CA 13 Circuit Court Patrick Collins v. John Does 1-347.

    My ISP has the wrong name on the account (but correct address and billing info). MTQ or wait it out?

  4. Could we please get a dedicated blog post for the 12-05673 CA 05 case? That would be much appreciated!

  5. Keeping all in one page maybe good also, since all these case are very similar, and the knowledge and information is helpful for other cases, people don’t have to go into each and every case to search for information, unless a Search for all sub-directories can be established, and
    new post forwarding remains for all sub-directories. Just a thought.

    • True. That’s why I’m reluctant to add more pages (which is easy). Nonetheless, I’ll rather honor explicit requests, but will write in large friendly letters: “Please keep discussion on this page strictly related to the case only” or something like that.

      • One of the reasons I think the Florida cases are so far going well for the Does is that lawyers who want to defend Does have this forum page to advertise and post ideas. So maybe an idea would be to add pages that are state specific (like Maryland or New York for example) where the trolls are currently piling on the lawsuits?

  6. Actually, the 12-05673 CA 05 case is a little bit different because it doesn’t appear to be a bittorrent case so it would be nice if it had it’s own section, or at least a section devoted to these kinds of cases….

  7. Hmm does anyone know the details of the 12-01794 CA 13 Circuit Court Patrick Collins v. John Does 1-347 case? like what was supppsedly downloaded and how ? nobody uses torrents here in my house

  8. Good news for does who have not kept up on this case like me.
    On 03/01/2012 CASE NO. 1:11-23036-RNS Dismissed without prejudice.
    AF HOLDINGS, LLC vs DOES 1 – 162

    PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF DISMISSAL OF REMAINING DOE DEFENDANTS
    Plaintiff, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby
    dismisses without prejudice all causes of action in the complaint against the remaining Doe
    defendants. The remaining Doe defendants dismissed under this Notice have filed neither an
    answer to the complaint nor a motion for summary judgment with respect to the same. Dismissal
    under Rule 41(a)(1) is therefore appropriate.

    The troll was Joseph Perea (I believe one of Steele’s goons).

  9. Good news for does accused who have not kept up with the case on 03/01/2012 AF HOLDINGS vs DOES 1 – 162 CASE NO. 1:11-23036-RNS has been dissmissed without prejudice.

    PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF DISMISSAL OF REMAINING DOE DEFENDANTS
    Plaintiff, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby
    dismisses without prejudice all causes of action in the complaint against the remaining Doe
    defendants. The remaining Doe defendants dismissed under this Notice have filed neither an
    answer to the complaint nor a motion for summary judgment with respect to the same. Dismissal
    under Rule 41(a)(1) is therefore appropriate.

    The troll was Joseph Perea (I believe one of Steele’s goons) and filed in Southern District Florida.

    • After taking a look, some observations:

      The AF Holdings 1-162 case was filed in August 2011. The trolls already received a time extension in December 2011, and were coming up on the limit of the extension. Judge Robert N. Scola, Jr. gave an Example Scheduling timeline on 12/8/11 with 120 day deadline to complete fact discovery.

      It is not clear from the RFC Express listing how many Does settled prior to the dismissal of the rest.

      Joseph Perea is listed as a lawyer for Prenda, the Steele Hansmeier offspring.

      The initial case information included Attorney contact information for both
      Neil Howard Rubin at one address and “ “Joanne Diez, Lipcon Margulies & Alsina” at a second address.

      The second address, for Joanne Diez, of Lipcon, Margulies, Alsina & Winkleman, has the same building address as Keith Lipscomb, with the Miami law firm of Lipscomb Eisenberg, & Baker PL.

      Lipcon, Margulies, Alsina & Winkleman, P.A is a law group that appears to do mainly maritime law cases.

      An October 18, 2011 notice lists Joanne Diez, Esq. as a counsel for Steele Hansmeier PLLC (which spawned Prenda).

      Keith Lipscomb and Joanne Diez, both attended Cornell law school, and both have been in practice for about the same length of time.

      http://lawyers.law.cornell.edu/lawyer/michael-keith-lipscomb-532974
      http://lawyers.law.cornell.edu/lawyer/joanne-diez-517751

      Lipscomb is the attorney Keith Lipscomb reportedly felt that he had a strong case against a female nurse in the northeast in a filing including hundreds of other Does. He said that the nurse would have prove both that her Wi-Fi was unprotected and that someone else did the downloads. He further said that the plaintiff would investigate the signal strength of the WiFi, and subpoena & depose neighbors. “If the neighbors have a computer and internet then there is no reason to hack.”

      http://ctwatchdog.com/finance/downloading-pirated-movies-can-damage-your-career-and-cost-you-thousands-of-dollars/3

      Lipscomb has been the attorney of record for numerous Miami-Dade county mass infringement cases involving thousands of Does.

      AF Holdings is a business entity for Heartbreaker Films, which is a production company started by the porn performer Nina Mercedez “along side director Raymond Balboa”.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Mercedez

      The Wikipedia listing for Mercedez reads like a PR release. The Wikipedia page does not currently mention that AF Holdings has filed at least 17 troll cases in at least 8 states, including well over 3000 Does.

      AF Holdings started a third Florida southern district copyright trolling case on March 6, 2012.

      AF Holdings is an LLC in Saint Kitts and Nevis. Since Mercedez and Balboa started their company after working with other porn studios, offshoring a “business” shell company may be the practice of more than one troll plaintiff.

      • Nu Corp is another Foreign Company incorporated in Dominica. They have 20 years tax free status and the owner’s information is recorded nowhere and its a crime to reveal it to outsiders.

        They are busy suing people for copyrights that in many cases have pending registrations.

        Probably a honeypot scam…

        • Majority of Nucorp’s registrations are ‘too little too late’ – filed so long after publish date that they don’t qualify for statutory damages. Many are also filed with M.K. Lipscomb’s name all over them. Most of their titles have especially explicit words or phrases that appear to be engineered for maximum search engine hits.
          Most certainly honeypots. Dirty hands on the distribution of the file as well as the registration of the copyright. Suits for Nucorp titles demand statutory damages that the titles don’t qualify for.

          Looks like a scam. Sounds like a scam. Walks like a scam.

          Fuck it, it’s a duck!

  10. I also got the same letter as AnonJD, only we called the phone number before we found this page. My dad is an attorney, and when I showed it to him, he made some phone calls and told me that it is related to my use of a website called pornbb.org. The Lightspeed attorney didn’t just know my IP number. He told my dad all the details about my computer, my browser, the page I found on pornbb.org, and all kinds of other stuff! So my dad says I’m fucked and I should be happy they are willing to take a settlement. But these guys said they want $3400! Why can’t I just pay for a membership now, and call us even?

    But I know that people post their own passwords to pornbb. So if they PAID for a password and posted it to let someone else use it later, then why should that be illegal for me to use? My dad said that he will help me pay the settlement, but we might look into suing pornbb.org for making it look like they were legally giving away free passwords. Does anyone else think that is a good idea?

    • —————–

      Even many very good attorneys with intellectual property experience don’t know much about the recent trolling scams. It may be that your father’s view is based on the general ideas, like the theoretical cost in time and money to defend a civil suite. Probably your father can speak to attorneys who have dealt directly with this kind of case.

      It would be good for your father to read up on these questionable troll schemes, including the previous actions of Steve Lightspeed and the trolls working with him. Some have called the troll actions extortion. He should also know that hundreds of thousands have been dragged into the troll net, and the number of Does who have been served (not even taken to trial) is tiny:

      https://fightcopyrighttrolls.com/2012/03/01/prenda-law-makes-the-classified-number-of-actually-served-defendants-public/

      It’s possible that your father has little computer forensics background, The so-called evidence claimed by the troll attorney is weak or even made up, but seem stronger to a less informed person.

      Click to access gov.uscourts.dcd.150694.18.0.pdf


      (“4. A specified IP address cannot be assumed to belong to any particular device since the hardware address of a device can be spoofed.” and much more…)

      By description, this is a password honeypot scam instead of a torrent honeypot scam. The password scams are newer. The legal arguments that the trolls threaten with would be different and possibly even WEAKER than the bittorent extortion. Using a password would not involve “sharing” so trolls could not use their twisted arguments that a Doe is distributing “works”.

      Without alleged sharing, the joinder for the discovery (getting the ISP to release your information) for the group of Does may have been particularly improper.

      Also, it’s common for trolls to lower their demand price when negotiating with an attorney

      https://torrentlawyer.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/small-doe-bittorrent-cases-in-home-state/

      That would only be if after study, settlement was considered. Keep in mind that the rolls have no interest in fairness. They want to just quickly grab as much cash as they can. trolls have no interest in fairness. They want to just quickly grab as much cash as they can.

  11. If you want to sue anybody, you should sue Neustar for the notices they send out! The whole purpose of these lawsuits is to reveal the identity of Does and they send out a notice that suggests that you should call the trolls lawyer if you have any questions about it! More than a few people have made the mistake of calling O’Malley and unintentionally giving away their identity. Hopefully your father called an represented himself as an attorney and not as the defendant.

    • This case was filed on 2/14/12. Some of the Miami-Dade cases are moving fast with the granting of discovery. It is unfortunate that this county court is not aligned yet with the many Federal courts that have tossed these flawed mass cases.

      Neustar is a large company with a market cap of over 2 billion dollars. They are much more than a records management business. Part of their business involves computer forensics and digital watermarking.

      They appear to be releasing information quickly compared to other providers. Despite the legal know how of a big corporation, they continue to send out letters that may lead to the risk of a Doe needlessly contacting a plaintiff attorney.

  12. I am also a Doe on the Case 12-05673 CA 05 and have retained a lawyer.

    This case is analogous to someone (a Doe) going to a free timeshare seminar (provided by one of the hundred free password websites) that is put on by an owner (Lightspeed Media) with a troll in the background. After saying NO to the timeshare the Doe then gets a free trip whereas after the trip the troll sues the Doe for not buying the time share….even though the trip was mentioned to be a free one with no strings attached at the seminar.

    If you don’t think the trolls, the website owners themselves and Lightspeed media know and have known about each other for years, you are naive. They all now have planned together, except for the possibility of the website, to extort money out of innocent individuals.

    It’s those websites themselves that knowingly advertise these companies, at the possible command of these companies, in order to hopefully gain more business or if not, work in conjunction with a troll to entrap a Doe. It is these middlemen websites that provide access to a company’s media that should be the focus of a trolls lawsuit. But of course not…because there are only a hundred of those websites out there…and millions of innocent Doe’s to go after.

    I personally have no idea how my IP address got a Neustar letter. But I do know there is only the possibilty of a very few passwords given out, by these websites, to gain access to Lightspeed’s stuff. This tells you that no Doe actually did any hacking….that was providing for you by Lightspeed themselves thru a website probably on purpose….with a troll watching. If you fell for the websites own acknowledgement of advertising for Lightspeed and/or acting as a “password testing site” for Lightspeed (and all other sites listed on the website) and you did not purchase an actual membership, you are now involved with this scam.

    Keep in mind – the trolls and Lightspeed know and have known about these websites. Even if the website is not directly involved in the scam, Lightspeed and the troll are using the website to scam Does out of money.

  13. I wouldn’t say they are sneaking away. They really can’t. How else is there to explain hundreds of Does, from different parts of the country, accessing a website, at the approximate same time. It’s because a website or two advertise passwords. There is no other explanation.

    Who really knows if these type of websites are directly in on the scandal, but it’s obvious THEY are the one’s responsible and are the ones who the trolls should really go after. But the trolls and the company’s don’t go after them because there are thousands of more Does to pursue instead. These websides AID the trolls (either knowingly or not) and their companies….so why should the trolls go after them? The troll scumbags would lose millions if they went after these websites because the websites would close down…..hence the trolls and the companies they represent would have no money making scandal.

    Just to let you know, there are many more websites of this sort STILL functioning today. And I’m willing to bet a handful of them is directly in on the scandal. Yours probably wasn’t and got passwords from another website, found out about what’s going on and got scared.

    These are my thoughts only and not of the attorney I hired. I express them here because this is a great website and there are many more people out there who know more than me about this type of stuff. It’s good to be as educated as possible on this type of crap. Any more feedback would be appreciated.

  14. 1. Trolling was never about content protection. Above board content producers are using DMCA takedown notices and ISP graduated response through the “Memorandum of Understanding”. Many posts have made this point.

    2. As Why You says, more torrent sites, tube sites, and password sites means more possible troll threats to individuals. Trolls would like to use financial threat to thousands of parties instead of a few.

    3. Some of these sites may be deliberate honeypots, or may be seeded by trolls for honeypot purposes. (Google searches that include terms such as honeypot, copyright, troll, adult will link to information.)

    4. Since minors can get on some public sites, the honeypot seeding by the trolls may by itself be a legal problem for the trolls.

    5. All these things and others would be investigated if trolls had to go forward with real legal decisions. It’s one factor for trolls not going to trial. Judges will get the word after a while anyway.

  15. Ok, so this LOOKS like good news to me, but I want to show everyone here for other opinions on the matter.

    First off, this pertains to Case #2011-29024-CA-01 [Boy Racer Inc vs. John Does (1-615)]. I went to the Miami-Dade clerk website (http://www2.miami-dadeclerk.com/civil/Search.aspx), searched for my case (clicked “Local Case Number” tab and entered the case # information). If I look to the right of the information, I see an “ODIS” link that states “Order of Dismissal”. I click dockets, and I see that there has been a bunch of activity since the judge threw out all the anonymous MTQs. I clicked the link on the left labeled “28039 / 2741” for the latest filed document. What comes up is a 9-page document similar to the MTQs that were filed, however this one seems to have some court-appointed action taken on it. The last page is what interests me the most:

    4) This Court’s Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Non-Party Internet Service Providers (“ISP’s”) To Disclose Identifying Information Regarding Unknown John Doe Defendants 1-615, dated October 13, 2011, is VACATED in its entirety and the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are relieved of their obligation to respond to any subpoenas served by the plaintiff.
    5) Counsel for Plaintiff shall provide a copy of this Order to all ISPs identified in Exhibit A to the Complaint in this action, within 5 days of the date of this Order.

    Now, this document mentions specific John Doe numbers (233, 376, 486), but these last two entries appear to apply to ALL John Does. Can someone sift through the legalese and clarify this action taken by the court?

    Thanks,
    Cautiously Optimistic John Doe

    • Very good news indeed. Judge Shumacher acknowledged that a state court does not have jurisdiction over what is essentially a claim of copyright infringement and vacated its order to compel the ISPs to disclose Doe information and dismissed plaintiff’s complaint for a bill of discovery. This is a great victory for the Does! Prenda gets pounded–again

        • It is Prenda. The dismissal WITH prejudice is 9 pages, in the list of notifications is Joe Pariah of Prenda.

          It is a good read!

          Johnny Boy, I think your little bill of discovery scam is about to come to an end….

        • It lists Steele/Hanmeier and Joseph Perea. Plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed WITH prejudice (Last line on Page 8). LOL! Suck it Steele!

          DTD 🙂

        • John Steele & Prenda Law is helping doe defendants in so many ways. Thank you John, for abusing the system , pissing off Judges (Federal and State) and making it more difficult for the other douche bags like you.

        • This is probably obvious to everyone but I’ll mention it anyway. Since June of 2011 there have been 13 Boy Racer lawsuits filed across the country including Joseph Perea’s filing of 2 in the Southern District of Florida today. I am sure these filed suits are great for Prenda and its proxies to use as weapons to induce settlements of the Does whose information they obtained from these Florida bill of discovery complaints but wanna guess how many of these lawsuits have progressed forward after the filing of a complaint and corporate disclosure statement? That’s right class the answer is ZERO

    • The judge granted the MTQ for the defendants you have listed, and dismissed the entire case WITH prejudice.

  16. So has Boy Racer vs 1-615 been officially dismissed? (Case #2011-29024-CA-01) Can somebody please clarify these details? Thanks so much and keep up the great work being performed daily on this site and putting these dirtbags at Prenda (and others) where they belong.

    • Looks like SJD will put something out. Bottom line: The case is dismissed with prejudice. The judge wasn’t too happy. We need to forward this to some of the AZ copyright defense lawyers. You can download the full order at the MD Web site – see previous link.

      DTD 🙂

  17. Ok I have now recieved my 3rd call from Mike Thornton, now saying that there is a hearing tomorrow, March 21rst and I NEED to call him back immediately to let him know if I will be represented or I am wanting to settle this on my own! LOL It’s soooo NOT funny but I have to laugh to not let myself get stressed over this non-sense! I just come to this site and read and read, it makes me feel much better:)
    I know that there is a hearing tomorrow on docket at 9:30am for Cancellation Notice? Can anyone tell me what exactly that means?? It’s Miami-Dade case 2011-37821-CA-22

    • If you don’t get a quick response from anyone on this site, you might be able to give the law firm of Lalchandani Simon PL a call. Their website says they’re representing Does in that case and they offer a free consultation. Maybe just use their free consultation to as a few questions? Just an idea. Best of luck!

    • I saw this as well. What it looks like, and this is just a guess, is that there *was* a hearing scheduled for tomorrow on a pending MTW, but then they dismissed this defendant rather than having to argue the merits of their case and the “cancellation notice” is just that. The hearing was cancelled since that defendant is no longer in the case. I’d be interested to hear from a lawyer though.

      • I would have thought that also about the MTW, but when Mike Thornton called he said something about this status hearing coming up and that he needed to talk to me before then so I was assuming that it has something to do with the case in general? But thank you for the help!

  18. Miami Dade Circuit Court Judge Marc Schumacher has just unleashed the equivalent of a 9.0 magnitude earthquake in the Boy Racer v. John Does 1-615 case in his March 20, 2012 Order on Plaintiff’s supplemental Motion to Strike all pending motions objecting to the subpoenas as Moot!

    Perhaps not being lawyers most of you do not realize the significance of this ruling. Finally one of the Circuit Court judges being bombarded with these frivolous “pure bill of discovery” lawsuits has reviewed the merits of the Motions to Quash filed by myself and other attorneys as well as anonymous John Does in these State Court Cases and spoken LOUDLY AND CLEARLY in dismissing WITH PREJUDICE the Boy Racer case against all 615 John Does on the basis of the court’s lack of Jurisdiction.

    When I saw Judge Schumacher’s recent 3/7/11 Order striking all anonymously filed MTQ’s, I notified everyone on this board that yet another Circuit Court Judge had invoked the technicality of requiring all pro-se litigants to have to deal with the Hobson’s choice of either divulging their personal information on their Motions (which defeats the purpose of filing a MTQ) or face having their MTQ stricken from the record. Consequently, to have a chance to maintain your constitutional right to anonymous free speech on the internet you had to retain an attorney to shield your identity.

    This latest Order by Judge Schumacher is now the only precedent in the 11th Judicial Circuit that I and other attorneys will be invoking to get all pending cases by all Plaintiffs dismissed with prejudice. This is the proverbial “shot heard around the world” that may just spell the end of all the “pure bill of discovery” troll lawsuits in Miami Dade County, Florida.

    The Trolls have to be in an absolute state of panic right now, similar to the NDF Fiasco involving Teryk Hashmi’s unlicensed practice of law and the 27 troll lawsuits he filed. Not only is this case dismissed with prejudice (which means they cannot refile) but all of their pending cases in the 11th Judicial Circuit are now at risk of being dismissed with prejudice. Not to mention that all the ill begotten gains they extracted from the unsuspecting John Does who paid them could now be subject to a class action lawsuit for their recovery.

    I have been stating over and over on this blog that the biggest obstacle to getting to the root of these cases is the troll’s tactic of dismissing John Does from the case to avoid the judges from having to make rulings on the merits. I was planning on attending the ex-parte hearing that the Trolls set once they first file these cases to try to challenge the issuance of the subpoena in the first place to get around their tactic of dismissing to avoid having hearings.

    Finally one of the Judges has reviewed the MTQ’s filed by myself and the other attorneys and taken a stand which comports with due process and is not an abuse of discretion. I commend Judge Schumacher for taking the time to analyze the issues we have been raising on behalf of the John Does and doing the right thing.

    I will be forwarding this Order to all clients I represent in these cases and will be filing Amended Motions to Quash citing this ruling in order to obtain dismissals with prejudice for not only all the clients I represent, but all the other John Does in those cases who didn’t have representation.

    This is not only a major victory for the 615 John Does in the Boy Racer case, but also a major victory for freedom of speech on the internet and everyone’s constitutional rights. I suspect that Mr. Perea will be taken to the woodshed by his troll colleagues for being the cause of the downfall of their little niche of abuse they carved out in the State Court’s solely to avoid having to deal with the more rigorous federal Court Rules and negative precedents. His belated attempt to try to get the Court to Stike all pending MTQ’s objecting to the subpoena as moot only aggravated the Judge who called a spade a spade quoting the Federal Judges who label these lawsuits “fishing expeditions”.

    Hopefully this is the beginning of the end of their business model of abusing the legal system in Miami State Courts like they have been doing in the federal courts.

    • I speak for everyone here, thank you, thank you for the work that you have done!

      You mentioned the Hashmi cases, any updates?

    • Wow Richard, this is fantastic news! I’d like to add my thanks as well on behalf of all the Does who have been caught up in this nightmare.

      So do you really think all the other Prenda cases are at serious risk of being dismissed with prejudice as well? Can this precedent be applied to the password hacking cases as well?

    • Thanks, Richard. I started writing a post about this event earlier today, but after reading your comment it is clear that the best thing to do is to copy this comment to the blog section for the world to enjoy 🙂

      • I’d like to know who JD 376 is and see the MTQ he submitted. Judge mentions him a lot. I wonder if it’s possible to get a copy of the MTQ to put up somewhere?

    • The state court document site sucks but here’s just a taste of Schumacher’s order:


      This is one of many lawsuits known as “copyright troll” suits. They commonly are filed against hundreds of “John Doe” defendants and then used in order to attempt to obtain or “troll” for names of subscribers of an Internet Service Provider (“ISP”) such as Comcast Cable Holdings, LLC. The plaintiff then uses that subscriber information to attempt to elicit a settlement from each named defendant before the defendant is publicly identified.

      The federal courts have shown extreme hostility to these suits, identifying them as fishing expeditions that improperly join numerous defendants (thus avoiding court filing fees), as failing to meet federal pleading standards, and as being used to extort settlements from defendants who are neither subject to the courts’ personal jurisdiction nor guilty of copyright infringement, but who are fearful of the consequences of being publicly named as a defendant in a suit that seeks disclosure of the contents of their personal computers. Typically, federal courts have dismissed these mass lawsuits.”

      For the rest, look at http://www2.miami-dadeclerk.com/civil/ for case 2011-29024-CA-01

      Steele’s jerkoffs sure do have a knack for screwing up. Every day I’m more confident that we will enjoy the pleasure of seeing them bankrupt and rotting in jail. At this point I’m having so much fun following Prenda’s shenanigan’s that I’m happier that I got caught up in their scam than I would have been if I had never even heard of Copyright Trolls, just so I can enjoy watching their downfall (and maybe get my own pound of flesh if things get really fun).

  19. I have clients I am representing in that case. You are correct, the hearing was cancelled because they dismissed the case against the John Doe.

    PATRICK COLLINS INC vs JOHN DOES 1 – 915
    * Click on BOOK/PAGE of a particular docket to see the image if it is available *

    Case Number (LOCAL): 2011-37821-CA-01 Dockets Retrieved: 48 Filing Date: 11/14/2011
    Case Number (STATE): 13-2011-CA-037821-0000-01 Judicial Section: 22
    Date Book/Page Docket Entry Comments
    03/09/2012
    CANCELLATION NOTICE 03/21/2012 09:30 AM
    03/07/2012 28030 / 2640
    Pages: 2 RECORDED DOCUMENT BK:28030 PG:2640 NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF DOE 692
    03/05/2012
    NOTICE OF HEARING- MOTIONS 03/21/2012 09:30 AM
    02/21/2012
    MOTION TO QUASH
    02/16/2012
    MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT BY JOHN DOE WITH IP ADDRESS 74.192.207.206
    02/16/2012
    MOTION: TO BE SERVED FROM THE CASE
    02/16/2012
    MEMORANDUM OF LAW
    02/16/2012
    MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
    02/16/2012 28005 / 1010
    Pages: 2 RECORDED DOCUMENT BK:28005 PG:1010 NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF DOE 269

    • Holy Shit!I just bothered to look over the dockets of these FLA pure bill of discovery cases and they are fucking revolting. If you have a legal background, reading these dockets is like viewing a gang bang of rodents. How do these assholes look into a mirror each morning to shave is a wonder to me.

      • A more puzzling question that might require a federal look see is why these state judges tolerated this blatant abuse/misuse of a state court to investigate an obvious federal jurisdictional matter (copyright infringement). WTF?

      • Please do not sue me for copyright infringement as I believe “Gang Bang of Virgin Rodents” has a pending 2012 copyright registration application even though it exactly resembles a 2006 copyrighted DVD entitled ” A Grand Slam of Rodents”.

  20. Any opinions on what this all does to pending cases…ie. Lightspeed Case 12-05673 CA 05 ?
    Gotta be good news you’d think…but I wouldn’t mind hearing people’s opinions. I’m sure others that have pending cases would like to hear some opinions.

    Thank You

  21. ***BREAKING NEWS***

    DON’T KILL THE MESSENGER!!!

    I spoke with the guys at Lalchandani Simon today and got some disheartening news. They said the recent order dismissing the bill of discovery in the Boy Racer case has been vacated. There was some mix-up in chambers where the court thought that it was an agreed upon order but it had actually been submitted by a single John Doe’s attorney. The order has been vacated. I know the Lalchandani Simon defendants were dismissed. Everyone else who was a Doe in this case needs to contact thier lawyer to see what their disposition is. For those of you not represented yet in ANY of the FL “troll” cases, please call a lawyer to discuss what this poor turn of events means for the “Doe” Community. If I get any paperwork from my representation on this I will post it here. Again, please don’t kill the messenger. You all deserve to know what is going on so you can protect yourselves accordingly!!!

    • Very frustrating.

      Does anyone have a copy of the Complaint in this case (Boy Racer v Does, John 1-615; 2011-29024-CA-01) that they would be willing to forward to me at FCT1430 at hotmail dot com? I would greatly appreciate it as thedocument isn’t available on the court website.

      Thanks in advance.

  22. This is rather upsetting, and to think that I thought I had some good news for this board. I can confirm this morning on the clerk’s website that there is an entry vacating the order from March 16th.

    This doesn’t make much sense to me, though. The court’s order is worded pretty harshly towards the plaintiff, and the comments made in regards to the case can be applied to all the John Does, not just the ones that can afford legal representation. Something doesn’t seem right here.

    Another thought just came to me: I’m noticing the plaintiff removing John Does that file successful MTQs through lawyers. What happens when some unsuspecting John Doe makes the mistake of accepting the “settlement” from harrassing phone calls from the trolls? Are the trolls following due process and removing them from these cases? Seems illegal if you didn’t…

    • What you are missing here (and I was too until I called my attorneys) is that the order was written by a defense lawyer and submitted to the court. The judge signed it thinking that it was a settlement order agreed to by both sides. HE NEVER READ IT!!! Look at the page dealing with this case specifically and you can read my comments and sophistcatedjanedoe’s comments as well. The judge just signed it and never read it. Of course it is harshly worded, our (collective Doe’s) attorney’s wrote it! We all thought we had a win here that would squash all the other cases as well. As soon as the judge realized what he did…Voila, vacated order! Anonymous MTQ’s are ALWAYS thrown out in FL cases. Get representation, it’s the ONLY way to make sure the ISP’s don’t release your info!!!

      • Re-reading the order, it is now obvious that it was written by a defense attorney, a judge would be never so recklessly one-sided, but… we all want such an order to be written by a judge and therefore our common sense filters did not trigger. And that’s humanely understandable: we always resist bad news much more vigorously than good news, even if those news are equally false.

        As for lawyering up / going pro se, there is a third way, and I still advocate in certain circumstances: do nothing if your work and family relations won’t suffer much from you being associated with a lawsuit, which is about about nasty movies. Of course one can argue that doing nothing can potentially result in an individual lawsuit and such, but be realistic: paying lawyer fees is similar to insurance against an event that has probability next to zero. No one would grossly overpay their car insurance, so why do it here?

        Naturally my lawyer friends don’t like this advice, but that’s OK: we don’t have to agree on everything to fight against a common enemy.

        • Well, choose to fight in every step will tie up troll’s resource and make it a more expensive game for them.

  23. Hi all,

    first of all, this site is awesome!

    I have my share of harassments from the nice people that run this mass scam but reading the posts here really helps putting things in perspective.
    I wonder how they live with themselves – it must be hard for your self esteem to know that you live estorting money from families and businesses. I can only imagine the satisfaction going home after a hard day at work and saying: “Hey honey, finally I got the money for that balls transplant I desperately need, directly from the retirement savings of that grandma who is paying the cable bills for her unemployed grandson”. But of course, to loose your dignity you first have to have it.
    And their senseless incursions here are really a sign of frustration, if not of desperation – imagine your dirty business starting to dry up, the thousands of people you have harassed starting to realize they can fight back since you are only good at talking and running… I would be quite nervous myself. Don’t worry trolls, somebody will get you sooner or later, and that will only open the gates to the others waiting for payback time.

    Anyway, in the meantime, I was thinking of a way to help this inevitable process moving forward a little faster.

    What about creating a page talking about what the ISPs have been doing? I am fed up with mine, I want to switch to another one which at least doesn’t bend over right away in front of these lousy subpoenas, but I can’t find much information about that. So I think that if there’s a place where this kind of information is available, it would help customers making their choice and as a consequence it would force the ISPs to shape up and do what has to be done to protect their customers’ information from scams if they don’t want to lose money.

    Just an idea.

    • I agree, that it would be nice to start tallying which ISPs are fighting the shady subpoena practice, and which ones are rolling over on there customers. I have heard AT&T’s name come up in reference to fighting subpoenas ( CA and FLA, I think ). DTD or Jane – would one of you be interested in championing the data collection, or starting a page where we can post and reference individual instances? With the massive number of these cases, I imagine the number of people viewing these websites ( this one, DTD, cashman, etc ) is quite impressive. I know I will vote with my wallet, and I’m sure many others will as well.

      If there is a way to help the ISPs that their handling of these subpoenas gains or loses customers, I would hope that it might encourage them to file motions against the new wave of subpoenas coming their way in Miam-Dade. It sounds like the judges have put the ball in the ISP’s court.

  24. Any updates on 12-05673 CA 05? There doesn’t seem to have been any movement for a month now…

  25. Couple New Lipscomb Cases in the pipeline. Subpoena hearings should be set shortly. It will be interesting to see if the Judge will give me a subpoena directed towards their expert and their technology in identifying IP addresses when I show up and seek one at the preliminary hearing…

    Civil / Probate Justice System – Record Search Results

    BACK TO SEARCH PAGE printer Printer Friendly Version friendly BEGIN A NEW SEARCH

    Party 1 Name: RAW FILMS
    Case Style Information Docket – Parties – Location
    Case Number
    -Local
    -State
    -Consolidated
    Sect Party 1 Name Party 1
    Code Case
    Type Filing
    Date Atty
    Bar Code Disp
    Date Disp
    Code
    Party 2 Name
    PATRICK COLLINS INC vs DOES, JOHN DOCKETS PARTIES
    2011-8344-CA-01
    13-2011-CA-008344-0000-01
    N/A 15 RAW FILMS LTD A UNITED KINGDOM CORP PN 02 82 3/16/2011 429554
    DOES, JOHN
    RAW FILMS (LTD) vs DOES, JOHN 1-871 DOCKET PARTIES
    2011-8875-CA-01
    13-2011-CA-008875-0000-01
    N/A 21 RAW FILMS (LTD) PN 01 127 3/22/2011 429554
    DOES, JOHN 1-871

  26. NuCorp has another 22 Does in their cross hairs:

    PATRICK COLLINS INC vs DOES, JOHN (1-22) DOCKET PARTIES
    2012-8861-CA-01
    13-2012-CA-008861-0000-01
    N/A 08 NUCORP (LTD) PN 05 127 3/7/2012 28624
    DOES, JOHN (1-22)

  27. While I was reading the Seth Abrahams vs Hard Drive Productions Inc. complaint a question arose in my mind as to Jon Nicolini of CEG legal status in the Florida Cases.

    http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/investigations/about.html

    The Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Licensing, licenses and regulates the private investigative industry in accordance with Chapter 493, Florida Statutes. Private investigators and private investigative agencies serve in positions of trust. Untrained and unlicensed persons or businesses, or persons not of good moral character, are a threat to the public safety and welfare.
    – Determining the identity, habits, conduct, movements, whereabouts, affiliations, associations, transactions, reputation or character of any society, person, or group of persons

    – The credibility of witnesses or other persons

    Currently Jon Nicolini nor Copyright Enforcement Group hold a private investigator license in the state of Florida.

    Individual Name Search:
    http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/access/individual.html

    Agency/School Name Search:
    http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/access/agency.html

    My only question is, does this apply in the Federal Courts of Florida?

    • You forgot to mention that a private investigator license in required in the State of Florida if the individual will be :

      Securing evidence to be used before investigating committees or boards of award or arbitration or trial of civil or criminal cases http://www.s2institute.com/content/_downloads_pdf/FL_Chptr_493.pdf

      It is a misdemeanor to act as a PI and be unlicensed which arguably could make any written statement or oral testimony of the unlicensed PI subject to being declared inadmissible as the information was obtained illegally.

      • I was just about to post that Raul. Thanks!

        Regarding Jon Nicolini as a Private Investigator in Florida would need a Private Investigator license if……

        Florida Statute Chapter 493.6101 number ’17’ sub letter ‘G’ definition of a Private Investigator : The business of securing evidence to be used before investigating committees or boards of award or arbitration or in the trial of civil or criminal cases and the preparation therefor.

        http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2010/493.6101

        Maybe we should forward this information to the Lawyers in the current NDFL cases

        • Sounds like a good idea, I know Richard has mentioned that he thinks these so called expert statements used by the trolls are their cases’ Achilles heel but I don’t know if he means it in this regard.

  28. I recently hired a lawyer and let him file a MTQ. Hopefully, this makes me be dismissed from the case. I now wonder if it is possible for trolls to keep filing another lawsuits against me (along with other defendants) and tell my ISP to reveal my information repeatedly. If that is the case do I have to file a MTQ every time I receive a notice from my ISP or one MTQ I just filed is good enough?

  29. Quick thing I just noticed in regards to case 12-05673 CA 05
    It looks like There was a motion to Quash filed on 3/22

    Date Book/Page Docket Entry Comments
    03/22/2012
    MOTION TO QUASH
    02/24/2012
    SUBPOENA RETURNED
    02/14/2012
    SUMMONS ISSUED DN01
    02/14/2012
    DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
    02/14/2012
    COMPLAINT
    02/14/2012
    CIVIL COVER
    02/14/2012
    NOTICE: OF TAKING DEPOSITION

    Not sure what this means or how long until there’s more results/etc, but even though I haven’t really contacted anybody and have just read up on the topic, this would potentially seem like a good thing right? (Of course unless the motion is denied I’m guessing)

    • Hey Richard, is this an MTQ for one of the Does you represent? Any updates on the case?

  30. How long does it take for court documents to show up on the Miami Dade clerk site? It seems like there’s about a week delay in getting updates…

  31. Jonas,

    If Prenda and trolls have the contact information, that’s they wanted with this case. Maybe someone will report on specifics. If things are still going on, there may be some Does whose information has not been released by their ISP’s yet.

    The trolls may have dismissed Does who’ve settled or Does whose counter-moves are troublesome for the trolls.

    The pattern is that once they have a Doe’s information, the demands (threats, really) follow. The description sounds like the demand stage.

    The threat would be that trolls would name you and serve a subpoena to you in Federal civil court, in whatever state the ISP address lists for your service at the time of their allegation. It would be a different filing in a different (Federal) court, with new fees and paperwork for the trolls.

    The easiest thing for the trolls is to make a demand, collect money from uninformed and frightened people, then move on and do the same to many more in the next case.

    These are Florida STATE court cases. It’s more work to get full info on them. They aren’t on PACER or RFC. Maybe some Florida Does can upload copies of these state cases.

    Go to
    http://www2.miami-dadeclerk.com/civil/Search.aspx

    Enter “Millennium TGA” in the name search.

    You’ll come to the case mentioned (Millennium TGA Inc vs John Does 1-529 Case No. 11-32619 CA 21).

    Click on “Docket”

    You’ll see the list. There some hearings on 3/29. The last listing is on 3/12:

    NOTICE VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF UNKNOWN PARTY -JOHN DOES WITH IP ADDRESSES

    See the link to ArsTechnica on SJD’s twitter feed for how the Florida state cases may be stalling:

    http://t.co/onhuzSED

    This is all for discussion and is not legal advice.

  32. Yesterday I received a letter from Charter with a subpoena from the 11th judicial Circuit Court in Miami-Dade County.

    It is in regards to the case: Raw Films, Ltd. v. Does 1-321 Case # 11-42407 CA 37
    Attorney for Plaintiffs is M. Keith Lipscomb of Lipsomb Eisenberg & Baker, P.L.

    I have done lots of reading and researching the last 24hrs and am confused as to what I should do, this is all a complete shock to me.

    From what I understand it is best to file an anonymous objection with the court by the objection deadline which is April 11, 2012. First of all, does this HAVE to be done through an attorney or can I write a letter of objection myself? I work in retail and am barely getting by financially, so I can’t afford much.

    I called a local attorney office and spoke with one of their assistants. She said the best thing for me to do is hire them on and they will contact the plaintiff’s attorney and arrange for a settlement. But this seems to go against all the advice here and elsewhere.

    In my research I have found the Lalchandani Simon (counselors at law) website which states they are currently defending Doe Defendants in several Florida cases, including mine. http://lslawpl.com/lalchandani-simon-prepares-protect-identities-doe-defendants-mass-copyright-cases/

    I am tempted to contact them, but how do I know they are legit?

    • Lalchandani-Simon is legit, along with Richard M. Viscasillas (Richard posts on this site on occassion).

      I’ll tell you right now, that I’m in the same boat as you. I’m caught up in one of these cases,and I can’t afford a lawyer (but I do thank Mr. Viscasillas for at least trying to work something out with me). I have no choice but to sit and see what happens, and I’m very uncomfortable about it. But, it is what it is.

      Honestly, any MTQ you send in will get thrown out, but if anything, it can buy you some time. Here are some things you should know:

      ABSOLUTELY DO NOT use your real name on it. Sign as John Doe or, probably more effective, your specific John Doe # and IP address (these should be highlighted on the info you got from Charter).
      Don’t mail it in from your real address.
      Even though it’ll get thrown out, for it to be technically consider, you have to send one to the court and to the plaintiff (thus the importance of not using your real address). Make sure you pay to send it certified mail, with a tracking # and signature confirmation.

      Best of luck to you.

      • Thank you for you insight, opinions and advice. I am at least a little more at ease knowing that the Lalchandani-Simon firm is legitimate. I did talk with them at length and he seemed extremely knowledgable of these cases and knew of my case. It would cost me a $2000 flat fee one-time charge to “hire” them to present a Motion to Quash. It’s a chunk of change for sure, but am I right to assume it will be worth it in the long run? Even if it’s thrown it, it’s been filed correctly by an attorney and from what I’ve read, the plaintiffs are less likely to go after me because I’ve shown that I take the case seriously and have done some research.

        Doing nothing at all seems like it would make me an easy target. But if none of these cases ever proceed, even after names and contact information has been turned over, it’s tempting to think doing nothing (and therefore spending no money) MIGHT be a good gamble?

        • All I can tell you right now is to shop around. There is more than one attorney in FL that can help you, and if you cannot afford $2000, maybe you can find someone who can help you for less.

    • I hired Lalchandani-Simon to file my MTQ and was already dismissed from the case :-). If you cannot afford to have your name revealed (you have a job with a security clearance, background searches, etc), the ONLY way to ensure you are not publicly “named” by your ISP is to file a MTQ through a lawyer. The anonymous MTQ’s that people had been filing are against FL state laws and WILL be thrown out. Don’t waste your time. Danny Simon handled my case with discretion and swift action. The MTQ filed on my behalf was technically superior to anything I had seen online (filed by another lawyer or the free templates). As soon as I saw it, I knew the I would be tossed from the case (all of their MTQ’s have ben successful). No troll would ever want the info in the MTQ being revealed to the court. Easier to dismiss the Doe, get the lawyer out of the case so they can go ater those not represented and rake in the easy dough. If you do not live in Florida, you can wait to see if they decide to file a Federal case in your state (where they have jurisdiction) later. And get ready or the phone calls and letters from the Trolls. I guess you could also change your contact info (phone number, address, etc) so they stop harrassing you. But even if you change it now with your ISP, they will likely use the info on file when the “infringement” occured. Don’t hesitate to call Danny or Kubs at Lalchandani-Simon to discuss your options.

      BOTTOM LINE: If you do not get an attorney to file a MTQ for you, YOUR INFO WILL BE RELEASED BY THE ISP! If you cannot afford to have your name involved in a civil case (due to work, background searches, or security clearances), I highly recommend you contact a lawyer well before the date the ISP must release your info.

      • You must have posted as I was writing my second post at 6:04pm. I am very encouraged by your experience with Mr. Simon and his firm. He is in fact who I spoke with. At this time I’m not really in a position that the release of my information and details about the case would “harm” me – I’m just an hourly retail associate. But having the peace of mind of being dismissed from the case may be worth the investment.

        I am a total fish out of water with all of this, so there’s a lot of blind faith in what I’m reading and hearing, so I appreciate your input.

        • Join the club! None of us knew a thing about this until the letter from the ISP showed up. If you spoke to Danny, you spoke to an expert in regards to troll cases. Believe me, you would be in good hands with them. They are passionate about stopping trolls in their tracks. I won’t speak for them in regards to their fees, but you can alwaystry to get a 0% Credit Card to pay it off if you can’t work something out with them (they might be able to make you a paymant plan). In the end, they went to school to learn the law, and they have represented TONS of Doe’s in these cases. I was VERY confident in my decision to hire them, and after the dismissal, I am very happy to share my experience with other Doe’s. They are very professional, and their fee is nearly half of the STARTING settlement offers you will get from the trolls.

          You can wait it out and hope they don’t name you in a Federal case in your state after the ISP releases your info, or hire an attorney and be done with it. My career would be “harmed” if this were on public record, so I had to act swiftly. VERY GLAD I DID. Read all you can on these sites and make your decision based on your pain threshold. Deal with the trolls for the next year, or deal with paying off the legal fees to file the MTQ.

          It is a very personal decision, don’t let any of us sway you into something that will make you uncomfortable or go broke. But the real question is what can you stomach? I wish you and all the other Doe’s out there luck. But, as I said before, you can’t go wrong with Lalchandani-Simon if you decide to hire a firm to file your MTQ. Just don’t wait until the day bafor the ISP has to release your info!

        • Thank you for your reply to my post. I am already considering a 0% credit card but that was a good suggestion. I at least see a glimmer of hope from your comments as well as the others on here.

        • Most of us are overwhelmed by the troll claims and methods at first. Things will settle down.

          There’s much more than a glimmer of hope. The Florida state courses will eventually get flushed. Judges have granted individual motions on behalf of Does. Judges will be embarrassed if they keep approving cases that Federal judges reject. What judge will want their prestige and career linked to assisting the most awful porn studios ?

          Even if the trolls “won” discovery, they would only reach the make-irritating-threats stage. If you told them to stop calling, by law they would have to. To follow through on their demand, they would have to file an individual suit, name a Doe and then subpoena a Doe. The troll cases have weaknesses which would be raised in real legal proceedings.

          Trolls are driven by greed. An uninformed person with plenty of cash to pay their demand is a better target. The troll pattern has been to move on to better targets.

      • What sucks down in FL is how you have to pay someone to get a semblance of justice. Anyone can run out and hire counsel but it is unfortunate that the FL judiciary makes that a condition precedent to getting a fair shake. Tsk, Tsk!

        • What’s even worse is that precedent creates an intensive to maintain a status quo. I don’t want to monetize my traffic because it would mean I’m interested in the continuation of the trolling soap opera. Although in my case it would be a couple of hundred a month – not a big deal — I spend more in terms of time an money, yet if troll defense fees become a significant part of a lawfirm’s income, it’s a different story. Do you know who lobbies against motorcycle helmets? Organ transplant industry. Do you know who lobbies for tougher immigration laws? Prison industry. Money don’t understand the terms “cynical”, “ethical” etc. Fortunately, scaling back from corporations to midsize firms to individuals, human aspects become more pronounced and even win in many cases. Therefore I don’t imply that lawyers who defend us don’t genuinely despise trolls, I believe they want this plague to end… I just point to the dangers that grow from the existence of the human being’s weakest spot — his pocket.

        • I share both Raul’s and SJD’s concerns.
          The Florida state court scam is terrible. Won’t Florida judges be embarrassed to rubber stamp cases clearly rejected by Federal judges? If many Florida state court MTQ’s are routinely successful, will it be clear that entire troll cases have no merit?

          As SJD notes, the system was developed for greed and may be continued for greed, by whoever.

          Some things may work against the status quo. One part of collateral damage of troll junk is the burden to courts. The court system is already strained. If troll cases grow, the system would totally clog.

          Also, are decision makers in the system willing to have support for porn makers be recognized as more of the public becomes involved? The trouble for courts and bad PR are two reasons, among others, for trolls to try to keep their profile low.

        • I think SJD has a point here. If a law firm starts making this their only business (defense of troll cases that is), and has no other major areas of law to work with, that could be dangerous. But, I think most of the defense lawyers we are talking about on here have been practicing law for a long time and did not think that these troll cases would be around this long. While it might be somewhat lucrative for them to file MTQ’s for us in the short term, I know that the trolls are making SO MUCH MORE off of uninformed Doe’s. Just these lawyers involvement in our cases helps to hopefully squash the trolls mode of business. I’d rather us not knock on them for making a few bucks off of those of us who hire them. They are trying to save hundreds of other Doe’s that they don’t even represent with every MTQ they file. So the funds of the few they represent may help the masses of Doe’s in the long run. I think that is a good thing. Sucks that it is so expensive, but no one expects that someone who paid a small fortune to become a lawyer will be able to practice law and not be paid for their expertise. Hell, just hiring a plumber or electrician these days is $90 an hour! $300/hr for an attorney is not that far out of the ballpark for a highly trained attorney. At least that it my opinion. Just like plumbing or electricity, better to call a pro sometimes than be left with a flood or getting electricuted for getting into something you don’t know enough about! My 2 cents.

        • I have a question. Once an MTQ is filed for a case that results in a dismissal with prejudice, shouldn’t all the other Does on that case be able to use that same MTQ to get themselves dismissed as well? I.e. if the judges grants it for one, is there any reason he wouldn’t grant it for others on the same case? I’m not saying we should all rip off the lawyers work, but not everybody has a lot of resources and if there is a Doe out there who does have resources and can blaze the trail for others so to speak, I know a lot of people would appreciate it. Especially since in FL you can’t file anonymously so you don’t really have a choice but to find a lawyer to file it for you. Again, I’m not trying to be cheap but if I had the option of paying a couple hundred bucks to a lawyer to file a cut and paste of a know working MTQ I would definitely do that. Having to pay $1000+ to be the first guy is a tough pill to swallow for a lot of people…

        • Anonymous, you won’t be the first if you a hire a lawyer that we talk about on here. All of the firms that us Doe’s have used are intimately involved in defending Doe’s. Any of them can file a MTQ for you. The judge does not release Doe’s, the Plaintiff’s lawyers do. And like you mentioned, since you cn’t file anonymously, you HAVE to use a lawyer if you want to file a MTQ in FL. If your job has background checks, security clearance issues, etc, having a lawyer file a MTQ for you is worth the $$$. But if you can deal with the calls and put up with the trolls, you may be able to gut it out for the duration of the case (from what I’ve heard on here up to a year of harrassment). I couldn’t do that due to my job consideraions. My MTQ got me released very quickly. Back to life for me, but I stay on these forums to try and help the rest of those who are just getting notices from their ISPs. Good luck, you have options, call any of the lawyers we talk about on here. They will consult with you for free. It costs you nothing to call them. Just stay informed and DON’T TALK TO THE TROLL LAWYERS!!!

        • Yes, Anonymous 3:51 PM, theoretically if the MTQ is granted for one Doe, other Does with the same situation should be able to use it.

          As DTD and others observed, some judges pay attention to MTQ’s filed by lawyers but not to pre se MTQ’s.

          You’d think at the very least more lawyers would do give discounts to a group of Does for the same case, which Richard Viscasillas has done in Florida. It would be little more work to file MTQ’s for a group of Does than for one.

          Sometimes judges in the same case will draw different conclusions at different times. This has helped some Does as judges learn about trolls during a case, but it’s possible a judge would reverse course against Does.

      • Can someone post the miami dade cases, or a link to where they can be downloaded?

  33. Apparently I am somehow caught up in this lightspeed case. Not sure how or why other than the possibility this occurred a number of months back when my computer was essentially hacked and virused so bad I had to do a complete return to factory settings on it (early November). I was extremely upset as I lost a lot of valuable files. So I am thinking that someone masked my IP. Anyway, not that any of that matters……All I can say is that I have been reading these posts to try to get some idea of what is going on, and I cannot help but feel that the entirety of this issue resides in Florida; it’s corrupt legal system, lawyers, and yes, judges. The problem starts and apparently is solved in Florida. Apparently Florida is the nexus of blatant and open corruption that threatens to sweep through this country like wildfire if it is not dealt with firmly. Living close to a corrupt country (Mexico), I know what this looks like first hand. The Judge Shumacher appears to be a real tool and obviously of highly questionable character and motif. I look forward to reading about him in the paper some day under a federal investigation.
    I am not going to hire Florida Lawyers and spend a couple of grand getting them to quash something only to have my IP magically show up in some other case and the process repeat itself all over again (Sounds like a nice setup down there). The way I see it, if the troll lawyers cannot prove copyright infringement which includes distribution of materials then they have no case. Seeing as how I have never once uploaded any files anywhere at any time ever, I think they are going to have one hell of a time conjuring up any evidence of anything.
    I have never used any peer to peer file transfer and I have absolutely no idea how a bit torrent works.
    I work in the educational field and so all I can say is that the second my name shows up on some case list they are going to be in for the fight of their life. Because once my name is involved the game is up, there is no going back and I am going to go after them and I am not going to let go until their scam is a done deal and they are wearing pink jammies and my bank account contains a clean 7 figures for reputation/career damage.
    I live in Arizona, and If they want a fight then they sure came to the right place, cause they are gonna get one, and I will not accept a settlement from them.

    • Good on you! There are troll lawyers in Phoenix and Flagstaff that help the Florida trolls file against ISPs and Doe’s in PHX. I’d love to see them in Sherriff Joe’s pink underwear too.

    • Kudos to you and wish you won’t have to fulfill your promise to trolls: although it is a noble thing to do, our lives are short and there are better ways to spend out time and energy.

    • I’m in the same boat. My MTQ was rejected and my identity was revealed to a troll by my ISP, so I have got tens of voice messages repeating things like: you need to contact us, after this number of days, we will not be able to help you, we will have no choice but file in your local court (I’m not in FL). We have looked up your employment and assets…. I ignored them all, and have passed their 30 days, 60 days, 90 days and 120 days deadlines. Well, I don’t care if they keep masturbate themselves, but if my name appears in a law suit or on internet associated with any of their cases, they’ve got a fight for their life. Yes, I have some assets, it’ll double or quadruple when the fight ends.

  34. I have posted a few questions here beginning March 30, 2012 at 1:46 pm and appreciate all the responses and insight. I was considering doing the attorney and MTQ route but the cost is simply out of my league and I really stressed out over the weekend over how I could swing it. I am single, work in retail, make $25k a year, have nothing at all to hide from work, family or friends. After reading some of the replies to my posts, I am thinking my most reasonable option is to just do nothing and stay hopeful.

    I understand once my information is turned over (mid-April) I will encounter the phone calls, emails and letters. The FAQ on this site insists simply to NOT talk to or respond to any of it. I can do that. Some comments have said this harassment could go on for a year. Is there a time limit from the moment my information is turned over as to how long they can try to contact me? How do I know when it’s all over? If the case I am a Doe in is ultimately dismissed, does that mean they can’t contact me any more? How often is a case dismissed? Is it really true there is nearly zero danger of being summoned for an individual suit? They’ll just get tired of trying to contact me and bully me into settling and move on, just because I don’t answer their calls, mail or emails?

    • Comment 7637:

      This is for discussion only and does not constitute legal advice.

      Statute of limitation-I believe usually the trolls have 3 years from the time of alleged infringement to start their case against you individually. If a case was opened by naming you and serving you, the case would last the time it takes to settle.

      There are two kinds of dismissal. If the case is dismissed with prejudice it’s better. Wikipedia says “dismissal with prejudice, in which the plaintiff is barred from filing another case on the same claim.”

      In cases dismissed without prejudice, it’s possible to for the troll to re-file. The trolls can technically keep calling. It costs trolls very little to threaten-just some scripted phone call or form letter.

      These cases haven’t been going too long. I would guess the older the case, the less demands there would be from a troll. If their threats haven’t worked in two years, would year three be any easier ?

      You may have read the steps required to bring a case to trial, such as at DTD:

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

      The more steps a troll takes, the more they may try to raise their demands. It has been rare for the trolls to go far along the path. It would be expensive to respond to a troll naming a Doe and getting discovery against the troll. Cases usually haven’t been getting very far (to naming, serving, and more) except where it’s a clear win for the trolls (like default). But it’s time consuming for the troll too. In the extortion cash grab, the trolls may prefer to go after a fresher less informed victim. Is it worth it for them to go after a person with no assets ? Or a person with nothing to hide?

      The Miami-Dade state cases are a little different. The trolls are using this court to get Doe information. Depending on the state, it may be a little more work for them to name one Doe in a new case in Federal court, instead of re-filing for one Doe when the group case started in that state’s Federal court. The trolls may not have a puppet lawyer set up in your state, or the Federal court in that state might be unfriendly to trolls.

      You can look in the discussion by state, for your state, here to get some idea how cases have gone in the past. Also look at RFC express, select copyright cases and the court for your state in the pull down menu. The troll cases are often easy to spot.

      It’s possible you can find an attorney to help for a lower cost. Think about asking around. Some have posted Richard Viscasillas giving lower rates when many Does are grouped in the same case. (I have no specific lawyer in mind.) Maybe there is a pro bono (free) law clinic near you (arranged by a law school or a legal organization) which could help.

  35. okay so I have been doing lots of reading on this. I haven’t been able to find ours anywhere. any insight on the case Millennium TGA, Inc. v. Does 1-515 (11-31922CA04. so far we got the subpoena for our ISP(which we contacted a local lawyer who said if they want it is public knowledge) so we did nothing. A few weeks letter we got our first settlement letter, again, per our lawyer he said do nothing. the deadline came and went with 1 phone call(left on voicemail, we don’t answer any number we don’t know) An entire month went by then we got our second letter, very short stating for us to hire a lawyer, have them call them and if we don’t do so by a certain date, then they will take this as us not settling. Well I will be damned if I settle on something we didn’t do. I worry about our jobs as my husband and I both work in sensitive fields but our attorney tells us these are scams and to not feed into it. We have contacted the General Attorneys office in our state who told us that they could help when we received a summons. So I guess we sit and wait it out due to we cant afford to pay for lawyers and if they want to come after us then they can come but will have a fight(although we have nothing they can go after!) So if there is any info on this case, it would be greatly appreciated.

    • Your attorney’s advice about complaining to your local U.S. Attorney’s Office is good advice in my opinion as this quasi legal conduct needs to be examined by the supposed guardians of law and order who have been asleep at the switch with this matter so far.

    • I’d really like to see some discussion on this as well. This is the first I’ve really seen of the ISP’s fighting back on behalf of their customers. Does anybody know if they are taking action in the other remaining cases in FL? How can this precedent be exploited in Does defense in other cases?

      • For reference, the 2 cases referenced are:

        OPENMIND SOLUTIONS INC FOREIGN CORP vs JOHN DOES 1-313 FL Miami-Dade County
        2011-32617-CA-01 / 13-2011-CA-032617-0000-01

        BOY RACER INC FOREIGN CORP vs DOES, JOHN 1-625 FL Miami-Dade County
        2011-32622-CA-01 / 13-2011-CA-032622-0000-01

        From my not-a-lawyer perspective, it looks like if your ISP was Cox, Verizon, Brighthouse or AT&T, that’s good news as they were granted motions to quash and/or granted protective orders – does should contact their ISPs to confirm. If those are not your ISPs, your information was probably released long ago and expect to continue to get troll threat letters / calls. Same advice about not talking to trolls or their agents still applies.

        Would anyone with more real legal experience please comment?

        • What does that mean for those of us with Comcast? I haven’t heard anything from anybody, no harassment…

    • It was noticed here and there, but it’s good to have a reference here, in the most relevant thread.

      I tweeted this article immediately after its publication: I often don’t have time to report on new events in comments (and especially in posts), but I try to keep my Tweeter feed alive and relevant.

  36. I keep an eye on the Miami-Dade site, searching on the usual suspect list of plaintiffs …

    Between 2/14/2012 (LIGHTSPEED MEDIA CORP vs DOE, JOHN 2012-5673-CA-01 / 13-2012-CA-005673-0000-01) and today, only found one new case:

    3/7/2012 PATRICK COLLINS INC + MALIBU MEDIA (LLC) + EVIL ANGEL PRODUCTIONS INC + K BEECH INC + NUCORP (LTD) vs DOES, JOHN (1-22) 2012-8861-CA-01 / 13-2012-CA-008861-0000-01

    I cannot believe this is a sign of things slowing down in FL. What I am seeing more and more is a collection of Plaintiffs all listed under the same suit (as in this most recent one.) Whats up with that – seems like a crooked/convenient way for multiple plaintiffs to piggyback on one court fee. But on this most recent one only 22 does for 5 plaintiffs, strange, unless it’s 22 does + hundreds of conspirators which do not show up in the title.

  37. To Anon at 9:14 on 4/3/12, comment 7736,

    There are a few cases of ISP push back against trolls. Hopefully, more will follow.

    https://fightcopyrighttrolls.com/discussions/discussions-by-state/california/comment-page-1/#comment-7161
    In this case AT&T once again fought for its users (although I’m skeptical that ISPs really care about its customers, I praise a recent tendency of providers moving to quash subpoenas). First, a motion to compel was filed by the troll in January and it was granted, AT&T then asked to reconsider – and it was reconsidered, with a beautiful “SO ORDERED”

    http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/51127/
    “But the ISPs that were subpoenaed – including Cox, AT&T, and Verizon – told the court that it was easy to discover that only 20 of the IP addresses were associated with Washington, D.C.”

    • DTD,

      Look at this press release
      http://www.prlog.org/11507845-law-and-technology-company-expands-their-business-operation.html

      ABOUT CREDENCE CORPORATION
      Credence Corporation, the law and technology specialists, was established in 2005 to navigate complex commercial litigators through the technical challenges of forensic data collection, electronic discovery and traditional document management. In five years, Credence has five locations across the State of Florida and has built up a reputation second to none with Florida’s most eminent lawyers and legal practices.

      Credence Corporation is a preferred service provider of Relativity and Clearwell and has a new state-of-the-art forensic laboratory supported by a network of trained and equipped forensic examiners who can assist clients worldwide.
      As a leading innovator in computer forensics, Credence Corporation has started to develop a series of training programs to educate law enforcement officers in South America and the Caribbean.

      # # #

      Credence Corporation, Florida’s eDiscovery Management Company, navigates litigators through the challenges of forensic data collection, electronic discovery and traditional document management. Credence has five locations across the State of Florida.

      Our goal is to become a trusted partner to our clients, helping them to reduce the time and costs associated with litigation. Our consultative approach and unbiased view of technology have allowed us to achieve that goal, creating partnerships with law firms and corporations across the state.

      Our list of services include:
      Data Preservation and Collection
      Backup Tape Recovery
      Digital Forensics
      eDiscovery
      Early Case Assessment
      Hosting – Clearwell and Relativity
      Imaging and Photocopying
      Legal Hold Solutions
      Managed Services
      Discovery Management Consulting
      Trial Services
      Optical Character Recognition

      The new office is situated at One Biscayne Tower, 2 S. Biscayne Boulevard, Penthouse 3800, Miami, Fl 33131 and Alex Feierman can be contacted on 305.389.0070 or email

      • I don’t know these guys, but there are some really good eDiscovery firms out there. The ones the Trolls are using don’t even come close to being called eDiscovery. Most good eDiscovery firms are well staffed, trained, certified, and experienced in defending their findings in court. They are also very easy to find online and obtain information on. Something we can’t say about 6881 Forensics LLC, Prenda Law’s technical monitoring LLC.

        DTD 🙂

        • Let’s see if I understand what is going on, Alex Feieman (an attorney) who is employed by eDiscovery firm, Credence Corp., takes an office at Troll Lipscomb’s office. Credence Corp., has been around since 2005 which predates troll porno suits so what does it mean? Are these trolls being fed cases by Credence or is Troll Lipscomb’s and group goin to start using Credence’s services to somehow ramp up their trolling? Is there something else going on here?

          BTW-checked Credence’s site and did not see any indication that they are licensed to do the very work their site brags about.

  38. So, while still being caught up in Miami-Dade Case #2011-29024-CA-01 [Boy Racer Inc vs. John Does (1-615)], I found this motion in US court to be an interesting read:

    Click to access gov.uscourts.txsd.940815.10.0.pdf

    Now what this Doe (not so Doe, since he used his name) did was something that never dawned on me before: using the internet to locate the operations of IP Addresses. I need to ask some more legal savvy members of this board this legitimate question:

    Can I use the internet to geolocate IP addresses and have that hold up in court, and if so, can you recommend a specific site/service that can hold merit on a motion.

    I’m one of those people on this case that is stuck in the world of not being able to afford a lawyer (though I humbly thank Mr. Viscasillas for offering me a reduced rate, and I wish I was a more productive member of society to take advantage of his generosity). I still have all the documentation my ISP sent me, and they sent me all 615 IP addresses. I am more than willing to sit down and generate all of the geolocations for all 615 IP addresses, and for any IP not in Florida, I will include it in a motion to dismiss in hopes that it will garnish some attention in the court (I may even go so far as to reveal myself at the risk of the trolls, but since mine name is not the name on the ISP account, I may have an out for that situation).

    I want to know if this can work and have legitimate legal standing, and if it can/does, I’m willing to volunteer my free time for the grunt work to get hundreds of mis-targeted Does freedom from this awful world the trolls have weaved together.

  39. Does anybody have any new info on Millennium TGA Inc vs John Does 1-529 Case No. 11-32619 CA 21?

  40. Hello – I would like to upload a copy of the Complaint filed in Patrick Collins, Inc. and K-Beech, Inc. v. Does 1-414 filed on December 19, 2011 in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court [ Case No. 11-42412CA30] to share with those who have not seen it. Please let me know how to upload.

    Also, I have been considering the possibility of doing a joint counterclaim to one of the Florida pure bill of discovery cases (sort of a reverse class action) but I would need a willing John Doe who wants to fight, and is willing to have his or her name associated with the case.

    Best regards,
    Sasha

    • Sasha, thank you for visiting us and for your resolution to fight back. Readers cannot upload anything directly to a WordPress blog, so you can

      – Open a scribd.com account, upload documents there and post a link: you may find it a very useful service for managing document online (and embedding them to your blog’s posts).
      – Just send it to me at sophisticatedjanedoe@yahoo.com and I upload it and post a link.

    • I created a sub-page for this case, linked from drop-down menu and from the bottom of this page (above the comments) and embedded the complaint there. Let me know if you want to put anything of importance (documents, links, announcements) to that page.

  41. Does anyone here have a copy of the complaint for Patrick Collins, Inc. v. John Does 1-915, 11-37821 CA 22 that could be uploaded? (the document that shows the IP addresses and allegations) I received a phone call from a Troll Lawyer but did not receive a letter from my ISP.

        • Thank you SJD!

          This is so frustrating… I received a voice mail from “Bill Higgins” stating I was involved in this lawsuit but I do not see my IP address, my ISP (Comcast), and in the “hashmark” portion it appears that all involved are from Florida (I’m not). What am I missing here? I know I haven’t downloaded or shared any movies so how am I associated with this and how do I find out what the actual allegations are? Also, I don’t believe I ever received a letter from Comcast about this. I have an email and call into them but haven’t heard back yet.

  42. I’ve been trying to find out what’s the current status on Millennium TGA Inc vs John Does 1-529 Case No. 11-32619 CA 21. I saw that on the Miami-Dade clerk site it says the last action was on 3/30 when a order was given granting a plaintiff’s motion to strike. Can anyone with legal knowledge (more than ignorant me) explain to me what that means for the case as a whole?

  43. Does anyone have any information on case 2011-13848-CA-01? I’ve been getting troll calls around every two months, and the last one finally mentioned the case number.

    Each of my calls has been from different people. I can’t remember the first couple, but the last one was a woman by the name of Loren Michaels @818-292-8930. This appears to be the same number as Glen Powers (also mentioned on this site). Must be some sort of collection agency.

    The information available at http://www2.miami-dadeclerk.com has no activity past 09/20/11 (about the same time as my first call) and I’m curious to see what it’s all about and whether or not it’s been dismissed.

  44. A thread developing on the Florida (federal) section is worth a read – could there be a convergence on the horizon for FL-state cases and the Federal cases? One can only hope one federal judge will be shown the connection and demand some answers from the trolls to justify why the hell they are filing PBOD cases at the state level and what the hell are they doing with them and why the hell are they not being disclosed in the federal courts – start reading here:
    https://fightcopyrighttrolls.com/discussions/discussions-by-state/florida/comment-page-1/#comment-9127

  45. SJD – Here’s an updated number for the Miami-Dade Clerk Correspondence Dept. – 305 349-7451. Took a lot of detective work to get it. This is the only number I was able to reach a human. The one provided above is never picked up. The process of obtaining court docs is incredibly slow and expensive (snail mail request & delivery / $1 per page). I couldn’t even get a local attorney to sell me a copy.

  46. has any one used heard one way or the other about how good Lalchandani Simon pl is ?

    • My memory falters each and every day but I recall Dan to be an excellent advocate. Very clever guy IMHO.

Comments are closed.