Prenda Law Tries To Dismiss Case After Being Accused Of Directly Violating Judge's Orders

from the these-guys-again? dept

Wed, Jan 2nd 2013 3:37pm — Mike Masnick

We've been covering a number of stories about copyright trolling law firm Prenda Law lately, and each time, we're somewhat amazed at their really brazen attempts to abuse the court process to basically get information which they can then use to pressure people into paying Prenda not to be sued over copyright infringement. Some of the more amazing cases we've highlighted include the one in Florida where the judge accused Prenda of fraud on the court after a court hearing that was worthy of a comedic movie. And then there's the ongoing questions about the mysterious Alan Cooper who may or may not be Prenda founder, John Steele's, housekeeper, rather than an actual executive running a firm that Prenda is representing. Oh, and let's not forget Prenda's big bag of tricks in another set of cases. Basically, every time Prenda Law / John Steele pop up, it's not long before serious questions follow.

So... here we go again. The site DieTrollDie has the story of a Prenda case in Colorado against one William Cisa and "1385 "joint tortfeasors." Basically, Prenda is trying to get information on 1,386 people... from whom they will then demand settlements. Unfortunately, the judge in that case initially allowed "discovery" to go forward, allowing Prenda to get some info on all of those people. Eventually, the magistrate judge realized that something sketchy was going on and reversed the order on discovery and killed the outstanding subpoenas to ISPs for info. The magistrate judge, Kathleen Tafoya, also made it clear to Prenda not to contact anyone whose info it had received:

Insofar as any personal identifying information of the non-party “joint tortfeasors” has already been provided to Plaintiff from the “joint tortfeasors’” ISPs, Plaintiff is prohibited from further communicating with these subscribers.

Sounds good... except that the anonymous person behind DieTrollDie noticed that a lawyer hired by Prenda, Timothy Anderson, had been filing lawsuits for Prenda in Virginia -- including some against the people associated with the IP addresses uncovered in the Cisa case. And, remember, the CO court made it clear that Prenda is prohibited from communicating with those people... and yet it's filing lawsuits.

The person behind DTD sent an email to the court alerting it to this likely violation of Judge Tafoya's order... and soon after that Anderson sought to dismiss the Cisa case entirely, without bothering to respond to the claims of violating the order. Whether or not the judge decides to do something about this, I imagine that the judges in the cases in Virginia may be informed about the background here...

torpedo8 00656co (PDF)torpedo8 00656co (Text)

Dismissedwop 00656co (PDF)Dismissedwop 00656co (Text)

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 trolls, john steele, prenda, tim anderson, william cisa
Companies: prenda, prenda law

35 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 3:53pm

Off-topic question
Isn't Alan Cooper the caretaker for one of John Steele's properties, not his housekeeper? Housekeeper means "maid" to me, but this could just be me showing my ignorance.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 3:58pm

Re: Off-topic question
hair splittey.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 3:58pm

Re: Off-topic question
hair splittey.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 3:59pm

Re: Re: Off-topic question
but yeah, i believe care taker was originally used.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 4:04pm

You just knew that Prenda Law were going to ignore the magistrates judges order and take action against the people that they have now been notified off. Prenda Law obviously have no respect for the due process of law in filing for action against these notified people in another state just to continue with their extortion of getting money from people. Prenda Law obviously thinks that by taking action in several states that these judges are not going to find out about the going ons of cases in the other states. Now their underhandedness is catching up with them maybe some judge will slap them all down.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 2 Jan 2013 @ 4:11pm

"these-guys-again?"
When you wrote that, should have stopped and put it aside. But if legalistic weenie-ing is all you've got, you load up your briefs.

Take a loopy tour of Techdirt.com! You always end up at same place!
http://techdirt.com/
All the news you saw last week on other sites, re-written to cherry pick points that fit Mike's agenda.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 2 Jan 2013 @ 4:12pm

Ah Prenda 'Law', and their valiant attempt to single-handedly save the corn farming industry of the world...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 4:19pm

Re: Re: Re: Off-topic question
How dare you call my question "hair splittey!"

(the original title of my question was "I am a pedant")
[ link to this | view in thread ]
88 Year Old Defender, 2 Jan 2013 @ 5:05pm

Prenda, the Law Bender
Has anyone contacted Timothy Anderson to ask if he still represents Sunlust? It would seem like a reasonable question to ask.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 5:42pm

I read this as "Pretenda Law"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 6:01pm

Re: "these-guys-again?"
That's rich coming from a legalistic weenie.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 6:07pm

These guys just don't understand/get the internet or pacer for that matter.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 2 Jan 2013 @ 6:22pm

The person behind DTD is infact... *GASP* DTD.
*waves at DieTrollDie*
Much like the person behind FCT is infact... *GASP* SJD.
*waves at Sophisticated Jane Doe*
All the cool nyms are known by 3 letters... like me, TAC.

Anyways, this get much funnier when you read this...
http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com/2013/01/01/where-are-you-going-mark-why-now/

Mr. Lutz is having a fire sale of possessions before he leaves the country. Now would be a good time for some angry Judges to make sure that defendants and witnesses aren't fleeing the jurisdiction.
I mean we do demand extradition of copyright law breakers, I wonder if that applies to those on the other side too...
LOTS of Money in a foriegn tax haven... seems like a good reason to flee before the house of cards falls.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 6:28pm

Re: "these-guys-again?"
Is out_of_the_blue really Alan Cooper?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2013 @ 7:05pm

Contempt
What's the maximum possible sentence for contempt of court?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 2 Jan 2013 @ 7:56pm

Re: Contempt
not nearly enough.
Who knows if someone actually looked into the business practices there might be a nice long list of felony charges.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 2 Jan 2013 @ 7:58pm

Re:
*dies a little more inside for not having patented the phrase*
It might have something to do with it being commonly called Pretenda Law now, a phrase made popular in the circle of those who follow copyright trolling cases.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 2 Jan 2013 @ 7:59pm

Re:
This is nothing, there is more entertainment in filing essentially the same suit in multiple jurisdictions hoping you can find a Judge not onto the scam, who will sign off and let you get names to extort cash from.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 2 Jan 2013 @ 8:01pm

Re:
"single-handedly save the corn huskers lotion industry of the world"

FTFY
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DieTrollDie (profile), 2 Jan 2013 @ 8:30pm

Prenda Law & Sunlust
Thanks for the story post. Copyrightclerk has noted that Prenda has recently dismissed at least 34 Sunlust case. Most of these dismissals are likely to have come from the CO Cisa case. http://copyrightclerk.com/2012/12/31/sunlust-pictures-llc-dismissed-34-suits-in-december/ I know there is one additional case from one of Prenda's key attorneys that was part of the Cisa case. I wish the CO judge would do something, but it appears the court may just allow them to run and hide.

DTD :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Digitari, 2 Jan 2013 @ 8:34pm

Re: question
If they are muti-state and muti-corporational would not R.I.C.O. work, as well as ethics violations?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jan 2013 @ 2:20am

Re: Contempt
not much, but fraud? That can take you places.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jan 2013 @ 2:28am

Re:
I substitute it in each time I read it in an article.
It makes each one just that little bit more hilarious.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jan 2013 @ 3:02am

It is a wonder how Mr. Steele is not yet in jail.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jan 2013 @ 4:53am

Re: Contempt
It depends.
Is this being heard in high court or low court?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jan 2013 @ 5:41am

Re: Re: Contempt
Mr. Steele and Co. are low court.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 3 Jan 2013 @ 7:10am

Re: "these-guys-again?"
Mr out_of_the_blue:

Why are you against a purported copyright plaintiff doing its litigation business out in the open, in the sunlight, in front of God and everyone instead of hiding and running to the darkness like cockroaches?

Why shouldn't plaintiffs be required to initiate separate individual cases against each defendant and then begin discovery?

If this is nothing more than an extortion shakedown (which it in fact is) then why shouldn't that fact be made plain for all, including the court, to see, and the extortionists be held responsible for their fraud upon the court?

If this is a legitimate copyright action, then there is a legal process the rightsholders can follow. Sue unidentified defendant. Begin discovery. Discover identity of defendant. Properly serve defendant so they can prepare their defense. Continue litigation. Repeat process for each individual defendant. Is that so hard? It's the way it is done. It's been done that way for a long time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 3 Jan 2013 @ 7:11am

Re:
Be patient. He may yet end up in jail.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shane Roach, 3 Jan 2013 @ 7:34am

Confusing Legal Issues
This reminds me of a man I knew who used the LPMud engine. The creators of LPMud had a license attached to it that forbade commercial use, among other things, but then distributed it for free. Because this person was a lawyer, they simply ignored the license because they understood that it was basically unenforceable.

Prenda ignores the judge because there are no teeth in the law regarding what they do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jan 2013 @ 10:03am

Re: Re: Contempt
Sending out fraudulent demand letters is wire/mail fraud, if they can prove intent. (one count per notice!)

Even though it would probably fail, i just want to see all these trolls be forced to plead incompetence to defend themselves.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 3 Jan 2013 @ 11:01am

Re: Re: Re: Contempt
He has millions hidden out of the country, expect high court.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 3 Jan 2013 @ 11:02am

Re: Prenda Law & Sunlust
ohai DTD!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 3 Jan 2013 @ 11:09am

Re: Re: question
Pretenda is a law firm based in IL.
They "hire" local lawyers to file the cases in each jurisdiction.
The shell companies they sham transferred the copyrights to are based in a tax haven where there are no corporate records kept and to try and find the correct parties involves having to hire local lawyers and put up $25,000 (IIRC).

IL has no ethics violations, I recall the case of a lawyer who was disbarred 6 or 8 years into his prison sentence because they finally got around to dealing with it.

Its copyright law, the odds of the DOJ actually doing anything to people "defending" copyright law are about nil.

Many of the victims of this scam will NOT come forward because the media would attach their name to scandalous porn titles and focus on that, rather than the fact there was no evidence and they paid simply to protect their reputation. IIRC one of their clients is currently being investigated for soliciting underage girls to perform in their works, would you want your name related to CP in any way shape or form?

Even if we "win" we are still going to lose, justice will not be served. Howell will still be on the bench favoring trolls over the law and forcing other Judges in her district to obey her demands.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jan 2013 @ 11:35am

Re: Contempt
I've heard that individuals can be held 'indefinitely' until they no longer show contempt of court.

The example was a case where an individual was asked to provide information to access his accounts online, when he refused, he was held in contempt of court until he agreed to release the information.... which in theory could be indefinitely....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 4 Jan 2013 @ 1:37am

Re:
And Lutz is now hiding out in Mexico...
[ link to this | view in thread ]