Prenda Law Issues Subpoena For IP Addresses Of Every Visitor To Critic Blogs For The Past Two Years
from the what-are-they-smoking? dept
This is rather incredible. We already wrote about Prenda Law's series of defamation lawsuits against commenters on two key blogs that have been instrumental in exposing their shenanigans: FightCopyrightTrolls and DieTrollDie. While John Steele has dismissed his claim, the other two suits are still moving forward as far as I know. And now it's come out that Prenda Law's Paul Duffy sent a ridiculously broad subpoena to Wordpress demanding every IP address of every visitor who has visited either site since the beginning of 2011. Basically, they're looking for everyone who has ever visited either site:Our client is requesting all Internet Protocol addresses (including the date and time of that access in Universal Coordinated Time) that accessed the blogs located at dietrolldie.com and fightcopyrighttrolls.com between January 1, 2011 through the present. Please provide this information in an Excel spreadsheet.The subpoena is from Paul Duffy, so it's a bit ridiculous to claim "our client" since he is the client. This seems like a pretty clear abuse of the subpoena process, though, coming from Prenda Law, whose specialty is doing anything it possibly can to get IP addresses, perhaps it's no surprise. The subpoena was issued in association with the original claim that was filed in state court. The cases have all been removed to federal court, and hopefully the lawyers at Wordpress know better than to just cough up this info like that. Even more ridiculously, Duffy tries to claim that this is an "emergency" so they shouldn't waste any time in handing over the info:
Due to the emergency nature of the requested information, it is imperative that your organization responds to the subpoena immediately. The requested information is perishable and vital to the claims asserted in a complaint alleging widespread and systematic defamation.What hogwash. They're looking for data going back to January of 2011. If Wordpress has logs going back that far, it's not like they're suddenly going to disappear. And, of course, the "widespread and systematic defamation" claims are already pretty questionable.
It's not difficult to look at this and see a likely attempt at creating chilling effects to try to scare people off from visiting those sites. Considering that Prenda has been collecting all sorts of IP addresses in its various copyright trolling lawsuits, can you imagine what they might do if they can cross reference IP addresses of visitors to those sites with the IP addresses they've already sued over?
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: anonymity, chilling effects, copyright trolls, dietrolldie, fightcopyrighttrolls, first amendment, free speech, john steele, paul duffy, subpoena
Companies: prenda, prenda law, wordpress
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Um, guys... really...
And ... it demands production 10 days from the date the subpoena issued, seven after service, although by statute,they need to give 20 days ...
"It shall command compliance . . . on a date that is no earlier than 20 days after the issuance, or 15 days after the service, of the deposition subpoena, whichever date is later." CA CCP §2020.410(c)
And why is the Complaint attached? Just to make a point? And what is the sudden urgency that the rules don't matter? Urg! Makes you wanna tear your hair out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Um, guys... really...
Wordpress (Automattic) might NOT control the domains of either of the two url's.
Though it does look like Automattic was used to register DietrollDie, and therefore that domain MIGHT reside on a host server controlled by Automattic.
FightCopyrightTrolls on the other hand looks like it is totally separated from Wordpress servers on a completely separate host server (ie: WP was just installed - it's a software program when it boils down to it) and if that is the case then Automattic has no ability to provide any IP logs whatsoever.
The other problematic (though more a logistic problem) thing I can see is the requested format of supplied information. Excel (unless they classify CSV files as excel) can not be used here since any log files of IP address's specific to the requested information would far exceed the limitations that Excel has. They could place it all in a huge CSV file but Excel would only read part - though since the format of Excel is specified in request then any information they receive is already suspect to reliability.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Um, guys... really...
Re the Excel issue: The subpoenaing party can specify the desired format for the production, but the producing party does not necessarily have to create documents in that format. They just have to produce in the format as kept in the ordinary course of business. (I hope that's tractor-feed printouts, but that's wishful thinking.)
My reaction to that was (again), um, guys... really?... Excel?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Um, guys... really...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Um, guys... really...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aliens
The lawsuits are all a red herring.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Aliens
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Aliens
Why didn't I realize it sooner. The judge is really the Doctor. That's why he wants everyone in his court on Monday!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Aliens
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Aliens
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Aliens
I once believed that calculus was a concept sent to Earth of destroy the minds of the young. (Register now while the lines are short.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What utter bell-ends.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's not a good way to identify people they want to sue, but it would be an excellent way to figure out what IPs to try to intimidate.
As far as intimidating random people based only on the flimsiest of IP address information, they are quite experienced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Oh wait...
[ 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:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nice
WordPress does not simply hands out information. While a motion to quash is pending (or after the case is SLAPPed down), they won't cough out anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I kind of hope so
Is is commenters or commentors? Spell-check is having a dickens of a time with both. LOL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I kind of hope so
You can see the evil comments I've made that made the big bad legal entity cry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
There are many AC's but only 1 "That Anonymous Coward".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I demand my nickel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Please Lord
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Please Lord
"I will come to you! My airplane is only 10k an hour – have more cash & Gold in the bank than you can imagine..."
;-}
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
Take a loopy tour of Techdirt.com! You always end up at same place!
http://techdirt.com/
Prenda Law! A staple in the "At The Bench" series. Mike sez (short version): "Wow. Wow. Wow. ... The story is gripping."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130303/23353022182/prenda-law-sues-critics-defamation .shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
The more Mike writes about Prenda, the more you troll here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
AC is really Alan Cooper.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
Should be interesting to see what troll, gnome, or Morlock the basement-dweller looks like...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
Well, good for you!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
OooB is a "special" boy with "special" needs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
From mom's basement I stab at thee!
(hissssssss....)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
Isn't it telling when the people propping up your copyright and corporations all happen to be complete scumbags?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The more I jibe at Mike, the more obsessed with Prenda he gets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Due to the emergency nature of the requested information, it is imperative that your organization responds to the subpoena immediately. The requested information is perishable and vital to the claims asserted in a complaint alleging widespread and systematic defamation."
Translation : Our ship is sinking we need more money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Excel spreadsheet?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Excel spreadsheet?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Excel spreadsheet?!
But the subpoena itself seems overbroad at first glace. The IP of everyone accessing the site for several years? They can't even limit it to the dates and times of the posts in question?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Excel spreadsheet?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Excel spreadsheet?!
Maybe one of them or their cronies are reading this comment thread and now they know. So if it gets that far, I'll have to send them an invoice for this consulting service.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now, go fuck off back to fox news.
Nigel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Monday, Monday...
Seems fitting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Monday, Monday...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
4,294,967,296 (IPv4)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4,294,967,296 (IPv4)
Oh wait. Maybe I should sue you for stealing my thought. Now - who do I hire for this? Prenda et al? Carreon? Ken at the zoo? so many choices...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4,294,967,296 (IPv4)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4,294,967,296 (IPv4)
fprintf(file, "Here is the list you requested:\n\n");
for (int a = 0; a <= 255; a++)
for (int b = 0; b <= 255; b++)
for (int c = 0; c <= 255; c++)
for (int d = 0; d <= 255; d++)
fprintf(file, "%d.%d.%d.%d\n", a, b, c, d);
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 4,294,967,296 (IPv4)
I like it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 4,294,967,296 (IPv4)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 4,294,967,296 (IPv4)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear Sir(s):
The below list includes all IP's that have visited us within the past 2 years:
1.1.1.1
1.1.1.2
1.1.1.3
...
255.255.255.255
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So it you could repeat each IP with each second of the day next to it.
All in an Excel spreadsheet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oops... I did not know and instead just went there to read those two sites.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Pudenda Sleazebag Attorney 1: "Nice little internet you've got 'ere mate. be a shame if somefin' 'APPENED to it."
(knocks pen holder off desk)
Goon 1: (cracks knuckles
Pudenda Sleazebag Attorney 2: Or, like, if it was to catch on fire...
(flick lighter ominously)
um so weider....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Maybe they should subpeona Al Gore to demand getting access to the interwebs office address!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We've got it backwards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
St. Clair County, Illinois
These guys look more and more shady with every move.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But come on.
There is something wrong with the mechanics of our judicial system when an outfit like Prenda has been able to carry on in civil court as they have for as long as they have.
This seems completely dysfunctional, and broken. We need tort reform, badly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ahhhh, drat
Paul Duffy's action make him sound like an asshat.
That oughta do it. I really want to see what he plans to do with the list, given that he does not appear to have requested the text of the comments. Asshat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://dietrolldie.com/2013/03/07/battle-stations-prenda-law-sends-wordpress-an-overly-broa d-subpoena-for-information-on-who-accessed-dtd-fct/comment-page-1/#comment-9729
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Prenda Law?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Prenda Law?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Logic Flaw
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Logic Flaw
2 - They want to cause more fear in their targets.
3 - They want to scare those of us who speak out.
4 - They hope that they can show the court this long list and make it appear that kajillions of people saw all of the defamatory remarks so they can demand more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Go F*** YOURSELF!
:-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If these clowns actually had a defamation, or whatever complaint, case they would have to provide specific details for every instance. Is there any precedent for the type of generality described?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What an orifice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you look at a DieTrollDie URL request it starts with *.DieTrollDie.com, *.wp.com, (and others) of which any discernig web crusader would of course notice and add them to the block list. The site looks funky without the formatting but who cares anyway? You can miss a lot of content but for general locked down web browsing its cool. (for most)
For sensitive sites vulnerable to an outright information, by hostile legal groups, grab I wold recommend using another forum program of which there are many. Why make yourself vulnerable to such nonsense when you can at least reduce the liability risk. WordPress is slick but it obviously creates extra risk. It is kind of like EA's always online policy but in a much smaller way. I wonder if there is a setting on the WP server site settings that would prevent this type of URL leak. (getting out of my experience so will shut up)
I understand the bandwidth considerations and they are severe so there is no easy solution. It's another privacy issue related to the immaturity of the information age.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Please. Many are assigned dynamically and change regularly.
Without the corresponding ISP logs this information is pretty worthless.
We need tort reform. This is a clown show.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IP addresses are only marginally useful.
The entire multinational corporation that I work for shows up under the same European IP address, for example, even though many of us are located in other parts of the world. It drives geolocation attempts based on IP address crazy. :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]