Porno-copyright trolls Prenda Law get hauled in front of a very angry judge

Discuss

23 Responses to “Porno-copyright trolls Prenda Law get hauled in front of a very angry judge”

  1. Todd Knarr says:

    I think Ken White’s opening words say it best:
    “There are few things more terrifying to a lawyer than a furious federal judge.
    Today I saw one of those things.”

    • Greg Miller says:

      “It was a federal judge who was furious, intimately familiar with the case, and consummately prepared for the hearing.”
      Yeah, they were screwed from the start.

      • I think my favourite part of this whole fiasco was the Prenda side arguing that the custodian was still the official owner or representative of the holding company… even if someone forged his signature on those documents.

        Please correct me if I mixed that up, somehow.  It would be pretty lollerskates if you could surreptitiously make someone own a company…

        “Honey?  When did I become president of Nothing Butt Scheisse Inc?”

        • Nash Rambler says:

          No, I don’t think you’ve mixed anything up.  You can make someone the owner of something without their knowledge.  It’s sort of like legal algebra; until the judge issues a ruling to the effect of “no, Cooper is not the official owner,” Prenda can argue that he still is.  So, X can be both true and untrue at the same time (i.e. that surreptitious ownership you are talking about).

          Once the ruling is made though, “X” becomes either true or untrue (my money is on “untrue”) and a bit more of the floor is eliminated for Prenda to tap dance on.

  2. Popehat says:

    Thanks for the kind words, Cory.

  3. Promethean Sky says:

    I loved the part that was described as a “Perry Mason moment.” That never happens in real life.

  4. Brainspore says:

    “a young attorney out of his depth who fell in with the wrong crowd and made bad choices”

    His mother always worried about him hanging out with those no-good law school kids.

    • Nash Rambler says:

      MRS GIBBS: I told you, become an orthodontist, but no, you had to hang around with those leather-jacket wearing lawyers.  Smoking cigarettes, staying up all night, filing frivolous motions.  I always knew it would lead to no good!

  5. knoxblox says:

    Regarding the fact that Prenda law is in deep doo-doo, I wonder if parents of lawyers ever try to strongly suggest that their offspring make sure they have a fallback career, the way sports players’ parents do?

    /sarcasm off

  6. I generally stay away from justice porn, but this is terribly good news. The capper would be passing the SHIELD act. There, you have your marching orders, ‘Merica. Get to it.

  7. SJD says:

    Although Ken’s write-up is by far the best, today I posted another witness’ impressions.

  8. Nash Rambler says:

    Wow.  Read the whole thing, and the previous blogs.  Fascinating stuff, I look forward to the precedent this case will set.  I could wax poetic, but it’s really the equivalent of turning on a light and the roaches scurrying under the fridge only to find out that today, people are willing to move the fridge.

  9. That_Anonymous_Coward says:

    Ohai Cory!
    Ohai SJD & Ken!
    Are we having fun yet?  :D

    The only sadness I have is that this was not televised.

    Remember campers you can learn more about Prenda and the other porn copyright trolls (there are more and some are just as ‘entertaining’) by visiting my friends…
    SJD – http://www.fightcopyrighttrolls.com
    DTD – http://dietrolldie.com
    They must be important, why else would Prenda have tried to silence them with lawsuits?

    And there are stories on BB, Ars, Popehat, Techdirt, Torrentfreak, Slashdot and a few other places but for the long term indepth coverage its FCT & DTD.

  10. elix says:

    So delicious… I can’t wait for Judge Wright’s decision.

  11. I’m not an attorney, so forgive my ignorance here, but hypothetically… if the Judge brings down the “law-hammer” in full on Prenda Law… could this case establish some sort of case-law that other folks (like, hypothetically the EFF) to use in future lawsuits or defenses?

    • That_Anonymous_Coward says:

      It would allow those currently named in Prenda lawsuits to file Judicial Notice of the problems.
      Many of the questions about how the evidence is gathered and conclusions drawn from incomplete “facts” in these cases should raise red flags. 
      That they often can’t prove more than a single bit of data was sent to the alleged infringer, let alone the file was downloaded completely.  That showing “multiple” hits in a single day and counting each as a separate infringement is not the correct path.
      As Prenda gets investigated more by what looks like its going to be by several enforcement agencies questionable evidence gathering will come to light and help highlight how little an IP address alone proves and make it more difficult for these cases to proceed with only the basis of our expert saw and IP address they must be guilty!

Leave a Reply