Totally Pointless Lawsuit Accusing Mobile Carriers Of Being P2P File Sharers Dismissed; Plaintiffs Say They're Happy

from the um,-guys,-you-lost-big-time dept

Fri, Mar 25th 2011 4:01am — Mike Masnick

Last summer, we wrote about an incredibly poorly thought out lawsuit, by a company named Luvdarts, developers of MMS content, suing the mobile operators, because MMS can be forwarded from a recipient to another person. The company claimed that the big mobile operators were no different than file sharing networks, like Limewire or Gnutella, because each forwarding of content was infringement. As we pointed out at the time, this made no sense. It was a silly argument that was really being put forth by a guy named Max Davis, who has an equally silly plan to add compulsory licensing to MMS content, and this lawsuit was an incredibly weak attempt to push the mobile operators into negotiating. Instead, as we predicted, it's been dismissed by the courts for failure to state a claim. The dismissal was with prejudice, meaning that the court doesn't want to see them again on this. The press release linked above is kind of amusing, because it has the folks behind the lawsuit claiming that they're happy about this result and planning to appeal. Guys, you just got laughed out of court, because this lawsuit makes no sense. Appealing isn't going to fix that.

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: file sharing, mms, royalties
Companies: at&t, luvdarts, sprint, t-mobile, verizon

14 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

xenomancer (profile), 25 Mar 2011 @ 4:36am

"Guys, you just got laughed out of court, because this lawsuit makes no sense. Appealing isn't going to fix that."

But, it could be damn funny. Imagine if they find another judge willing to quote star wars: "the force is not strong with your case, dismissed you are!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2011 @ 4:42am

Of course they are happy. Some people actually enjoy being spanked. In fact, I believe there is a whole industry based around that concept...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 25 Mar 2011 @ 4:59am

Interesting line of thought
"We told you to shut up and get the hell out."

"Being quieted and removed only strengthens our negotiating position. Now, we've got them just where we want them: annoyed and antagonistic.

Imagine if we'd been jailed or killed! The cellphone companies would have no choice but to implement our licensing!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2011 @ 5:08am

Mabye's they be appealing cuz dey don't want to pay for the defendants lawyering.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Killer_Tofu (profile), 25 Mar 2011 @ 6:05am

AC Argument #3.2
"There must be more to this story. I feel mike is withholding information." [ AC's book of Anti-Mike, 3rd revision ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard (profile), 25 Mar 2011 @ 6:15am

Better
Better sue the air - because infringing copies can be transmitted through it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- xenomancer (profile), 25 Mar 2011 @ 4:50pm
  
  Re: Better
  Better sue oxygen; it allows infringers to survive
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2011 @ 8:48am

Perhaps they are trying to simply show how ridiculous lawsuits on P2P companies are?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
max (profile), 25 Mar 2011 @ 3:48pm

Hey Mike, long time no argue...I am happy to see you are paying attention to this precedent setting case. You laughed at us last summer mainly because you said the carriers had safe harbor. Did you see that defense presented by them? File sharing may be a push or pull model. Either way it is still file sharing. If you know about law then you would know that the Appellate Court is where most case law is established. If you really knew what you were talking about (the facts) you would know that the carriers have already begun to change their public policy through our efforts. We are a pro copyright organization while embracing technology. Why is it that you say "come up with new business models" and as we are doing just that you try to tear it down? Because it is not YOUR idea of a business model? Stay tuned buddy, you've got a lesson coming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2011 @ 5:20pm
  
  Re:
  "Why is it that you say "come up with new business models" and as we are doing just that you try to tear it down? Because it is not YOUR idea of a business model? Stay tuned buddy, you've got a lesson coming."
  
  Hahahaha from you? and your little do-nothing, "lets just recast the same exact business models in a slightly different form so WE can grab some cash" nu-business? Really? ok then. Cant wait to see how you TOTALLY change the business and put Mike in his PLACE!
  
  In case you missed it, I wont be holding my breath. I'll be too busy ignoring Yet Another Middleman Business Built On Excessive and Overbearing Copyright Monopolies (YAMBBOEOCM) while it fails utterly.
  
  But good luck with that....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - max (profile), 25 Mar 2011 @ 7:21pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Yeah, well it is too bad you only have a few choices - respect the laws, change the laws or break the laws. What is your choice?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - harbingerofdoom (profile), 1 Apr 2011 @ 5:49pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      ill go with changing them glad to see you on board with that optioin.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Devil's Coachman (profile), 26 Mar 2011 @ 9:13am

Max needs to change his name - to Min
As in minimal intelligence, coming here and thinking that any thinking person is going to agree with his industry shilling. Step back, son, ya bother me!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 26 Mar 2011 @ 10:47am
  
  Re: Max needs to change his name - to Min
  haha...touche, well put coachman, coming here is like coming to a den of inequity (copyright haters)....if we ain't afraid to take on the wireless carriers you can bet we ain't afraid to debate the "thinking" copyright haters that think our ideas are stupid and uh hmmmm "of minimal intelligence".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]