More People Calling US Copyright Group's Bluff
from the where-are-the-lawsuits? dept
Mass copyright lawsuit filer US Copyright Group (really, DC law firm Dunlap, Grubb & Weaver) has been claiming for a while that it really, really was going to file lawsuits against the thousands of folks they've sued in the specific jurisdictions where they're located -- though many have questioned whether or not it would really do this, since it would be quite expensive and DGW is a tiny, tiny law firm. More importantly, as has been seen elsewhere, the business model of "pay us or we'll sue," doesn't work so well if you actually have to sue people. After it was more or less required to drop thousands of the lawsuits for individuals not in Washington DC, we wondered if the company would live up to its promise to refile the lawsuits elsewhere. Thomas Dunlap told some reporters that those lawsuits would be refiled last week. But that didn't happen. So, it seems like more people are believing it's all a bluff. Dunlap has backed down and said that they'll be rolling out the refiles much more slowly -- meaning it's probably still desperately seeking regional law firms to handle a few "example" cases, but may be having more trouble finding them than it thought. I wonder if the regional law firms it's been approaching have noticed how much damage has been done to the reputation of any lawyers who get involved in these sorts of "pay up or we'll sue" shakedowns. In the end, I don't doubt that a few more regional lawsuits will be filed. Dunlap/USCG wants to have its "demo" cases it can point to, so that people will pay up, but it's increasingly sounding like the vast majority of those originally sued will not see those cases go anywhere.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, lawsuits
Companies: us copyright group
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I was hoping for multiple jurisdiction filing, actually.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I was hoping for multiple jurisdiction filing, actually.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where are the tort reformers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Where are the tort reformers?
The real problem is that the government shouldn't be directly limiting companies abilities to operate, adapt, and innovate, but at the same time they shouldn't be sheltering the companies from failure. Lawyers need to be capped and regulated simply because of the protections they enjoy. Due to the structure of the legal system they are able to, arguably, perform extortion without recourse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Where are the tort reformers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Where are the tort reformers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Where are the tort reformers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Where are the tort reformers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
A million? Where do I sign up? Just kidding... How do you figure? I don't think the cases are that complicated. And don't forget that USCG has the advantage since it gets to decide which few cases out of the thousands they have to prosecute. They're going to pick the easiest cases to win. I think they'll pick cases where there's no plausible defense and where the defendant has the cash should USCG win. Or just maybe the defendant really did it. Even if they do spend a million, the real question is how much money they brought in while doing so. A few well-picked defendants could be just the jolt they need to get those pesky stragglers to pay up. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can anyone spell RICO?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can anyone spell RICO?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can anyone spell RICO?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Can anyone spell RICO?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ridiculous Is Completely Obvious..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now that the "model" is falling apart its in Dumblop Grubbers and Shysters best interest to keep insisting that they are going to re-file to maximize the return on the threats that they have already mailed. I wouldn't be surprised if they are not posting on forums like this to scare people who are searching for data on what to do regarding their DGW letters.
They probably will have to take a case or two to court just to show that they intended to. If they don't I can see the accusations of racketeering holding water.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Has it? Sure, it's generated a lot of bad press, but it doesn't necessarily follow that the lawyer have been hurt by it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey Bes up there
[ link to this | view in chronology ]