Copyright Troll Malibu Media Seeking 'Six Strikes' Info From Verizon In Lawsuit
from the but-of-course dept
One of the many complaints about the "six strikes" Copyright Alert System (CAS) in the US is the fact that while it doesn't directly lead to litigation, there is nothing in the agreement that prevents copyright holders from seeking out and using information from the six strikes system in copyright infringement lawsuits. And, surprise surprise, it appears that at least one copyright trolling operation has jumped to the front of the line in testing this out. Malibu Media, who was already building up quite the reputation as a copyright troll (not quite Prenda-like, but still up there), is trying to get Verizon to cough up a ton of information, including details from its six strikes system.As TorrentFreak notes, the list of information demanded via subpoena has been culled down to the following:
- DMCA notices and if applicable six strike notices sent to the applicable subscribers.
- Defendants’ bandwidth usage.
- Information about the (reliability of the) correlation of the IP-Address to the subscriber for purposes of use at trial.
- Content viewed by Defendants to the extent the content is the same show or movie that Plaintiff learned from third-party BitTorrent scanning companies that Defendants also used BitTorrent to download and distribute.
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
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, copyright alert system, copyright troll, information, lawsuits, six strikes
Companies: malibu media, verizon
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But that won't stop the Trolls from using that as "evidence" in court. And, as always, people would rather pay $1000 for the troll to go away (settle) than to deal with the court battle (which will become rather expensive, and the troll can just bail out and with no consequences).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That explains the request for strikes and notifications - I know of one other troll that gathers this type of circumstantial evidence in-house.
It does not explain the request for usage data. Actual uploading or downloading has little relevance in an infringement case involving torrent swarms.
They're fishing because fishing is their job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
In their minds, if they get the data and see that Joe Q Public had 1:1 or close upload/download ratio, they can run around screaming that of course he must be guilty of copyright infringement, that the only files he could have been sharing are commercial copyright files. The possibility that he may simply be sharing Linux distros (that can and does happen) or his own works or works he has permission for won't even be entertained.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
1. Get information on people who may or may not have gotten/looked at pirated stuff.
2. Send threatening legal notices about the possibility of getting sued en masse to those people.
3. Demand compensation of precisely-not-as-expensive-as-a-lawyer to make the legal threat go away.
4. ???
5. Profit!
The entire operation hinges on people not having enough money (or know-how) to actually go to court, because the claims the copyright troll has are far more shaky when they go to court (see: Righthaven, Prenda Law, etc.) than when dealing with people directly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Thanks guys for the education.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You can add blind, bloody-minded stupidity (and/or ignorance) to the mix. They don't understand tech., but that's what they're using to fight. An IP address != an individual. An open WiFi router can be used by the accused and anyone else in the vicinity. Networked printers and septagenarian grandmas have been accused of infringing, the latter never having even heard of Bittorrent.
Meanwhile, our elected reps sell the justice system down the river for campaign finance donations from lobbyists, and the courts fill up with civil lawsuits (maybe) that are starting to look like felony prosecutions. A quarter of a million dollar fine for ripping a DVD? Come on!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
the MAFIAA don't give a shit about 'the tech', never have, never will...
they are ALL about maintaining their gatekeeper status, and 'the tech' is making their stranglehold untenable...
so, they use 'the tech' to oppress us where they can, scare us where they can't, and scorch the earth where we want to plant the seeds of ideas...
fuckers have NO morals, NO sense of equity, and NO duty to society: they are leeches and parasites DESTROYING our culture, not preserving it...
IF EVERY ONE OF THE MAFIAA goons fell of the earth tomorrow, it would be a great day... (and NOTHING of value would be lost, on the contrary, great gains for the public domain...)
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The last time was the roaring 20 booze halls featuring flaming Tommy Guns and ALL Capone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
1.They Claim you did something
2.You do not have the ability to fight back as you are supposed to go to a Court Hearing that might be 3000 from your home.Nor even if it was close do you have the Ability to shell out 1000's of dollars to hire Lawyer.
3.You are more of a Sheep Person and just figure you might as well pay as that is going to be easier on your meager savings if you even have any.
4.PROFIT ! The A-Hole Greedbags hit the Treasure Chest again and again.
Yes, you see now ! F#ckers is what they are..........and the same to the ones in Government and the Caved-In ISP's .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's getting to the point where corporate-centric IP/copyright laws are more important than human lives. We should worry about protecting human rights first and foremost. If we can't even get that right, soon we'll have no rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
See? That was easy.
[ 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:
I don't worry about six strikes or Malibu media at all.
Why? Because I don't pirate. I don't worry about getting throttled or any of that other stuff my pirate friends complain about. I've never had any problems... because I don't pirate.
The reason the author and everyone here are throwing tantrums is simply because they're addicted to pirating and can't man up to the consequences of getting caught and punished.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The amount of evidence Techdirt has reported on about how many people are being falsely accused with little to no evidence should convince you of it.
But no. You're the type who must put his hands over his ears and go "Lalalalala! Can't hear you! You iz evil dirty pirates!"
I'm not even going to try explaining to you. We've tried countless times, and no matter how many times we explain that people are supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty, you're here waving your tiny dick around saying "No, you're all fucking evil pirates, and all that's needed is an accusation, no trial, no jury".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're just being a fear mongering piracy apologist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Can you answer a question for me please, honestly? Has that tactic ever worked?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sorry reality is an unpleasant exercise for you. Later
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What is to stop someone from looking up someone else's IP address, seeing they get service from Verizon or Comcast, and then sending a message to the ISP that they accuse the subscriber of copyright infringement...let me remind you, the only evidence being provided is an IP address, which is useless! What's to stop someone from not even monitoring torrent files, and just filling in a random IP address? As far as the ISP is concerned, the person making the accusation is telling gospel truth? What's to stop someone from making a false accusation? How does "not pirating" help? You can still be accused, even if you subscribe to an internet package but never actually once use the damn thing!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's not run by the public. I can't just "send a message to the ISP and accuse you of infringement".
If I could, I would have long ago...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If not the copyright holder (i.e someone in the public), exactly who does make the accusations of infringement? Or do you think that you must be a some mega-corporation in order to have a valid copyright?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's like saying "I never speed, therefore those intersection cameras will never affect me, only you dirty speeders!" I wonder if your tune would change if you were one of the people who's parked car was cited for speeding.
You are just as vulnerable to six strikes as everyone else, whether you pirate or not. The only way to avoid it is to not use the internet at all.
Which is probably the point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120913/06550920370/first-hadopi-victim-convicted-not-his -own-infringement-because-his-wife-downloaded-songs.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130 224/22341022086/system-used-new-six-strikes-cas-falsely-identifies-game-mods-as-nbc-tv-shows.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110724/01212715219/54-year-old-school-teacher-who-doesnt-know-h ow-to-download-movies-first-to-be-kicked-off-internet-france.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articl es/20130318/00132622360/kiwi-three-strikes-tribunal-fines-soldier-who-was-serving-afghanistan-when-i nfringement-happened.shtml
Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be putting on some ear protection, as I'm sure the sonic boom resulting from the goal-posts being moved as quick as you can shift them is going to be loud.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No. Nice try attempting to shift the goalposts again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57559105-71/speed-camera-gives-ticket-to-stationary-car/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7043325/Driver-parked-in-front-of-speed-cam era-gets-tickets.html
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/03/parked-cars-receive-speed-camera-tic kets/
Yes. Questions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Fixed for accuracy, since six-strikes system doesn't care about actual guilt or innocence, only whether or not an accusation has been made.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WOW
If this ends up being a huge farce to cover up the race to troll people for money the ISP's could end up being ruled against in court when someone decided to sue them enmass.
Seriously they knew this was going to happen, even with the promises from the industry that everyone knows is not worth shit.
Now the isps need to make a decision once and for all, do they want to be held liable for the content they transfer or not. If not then they need to stop their crazy agreements with the entertainment industry. Get down to improving their service and let the entertainment industry improve theirs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bandwidth usage
Instead of the tired old (but still valid) "downloading a Linux distribution" example, how about this one: running a full Bitcoin client. The traditional client (which should be more properly be called a "node", since it acts both as a client and as a server, in true P2P fashion) downloads the full Bitcoin block chain on first start up (all seven gigabytes of it, and counting), and keeps downloading (and uploading) new blocks and transactions as they come up.
There is no way one can say running a full bitcoin node is copyright violation. Yet, it can cause high bandwidth usage, both download and upload.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bandwidth usage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bandwidth usage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bandwidth usage
Well you certainly like to jump into it.
How about this instead of a $1000 rip off to a scam you suddenly are facing 10 to 20 years for running a money laundering operation, violating US import/export financial reporting requirements, fraud, and a host of other financial crimes that federal, stater, and local prosecutors can through at you.
Talking about stupid and ignorant this is stupid and ignorant on steroids with a manicurist death wish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, well, well...
Will those who liked the idea of Six Strikes FINALLY be willing to admit that they were...
Dr. Cox, if you will?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQxhOYqLPdY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another porpoise is to avoid missteaks
It is now clear that was Prenda's big mistake. They sued one party which resulted in their undoing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So you're saying ISP records shouldn't be like phone records.
But I DON'T endorse the tactics of MM: in my opinion, ALL cases filed should go to jury trial; juries have the power to decide what the law is and whether it's properly applied, to dislike and decide against the plaintiff on Populist grounds, and perhaps even to sanction the plaintiff directly. Of course, that'd clog the courts, empower citizens, and some justice might get done, so lawyers are under great pressure by their guild to avoid jury trials.
[And I think Mike is hoping this is the replacement for trivial and dull Prenda Law in his "At The Bench" series.]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So you're saying ISP records shouldn't be like phone records.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So you're saying ISP records shouldn't be like phone records.
No. Juries have the power to rule on fact. A Judge tells the jury what the law is, and the Jury weighs evidence and makes a ruling of fact, that is to say, what happened. They take that ruling of fact and use the instructions as to the law to come to a verdict. Many cases have been overturned in appeal because the jury made a ruling of law rather than fact or the judge failed to properly educate a jury as to the law.
"So you're saying ISP records shouldn't be like phone records."
Phone records can not be equated to subscriber usage data in this context. Most notably, Phone records were never widely (or possibly at all) used in this fashion. There was no major case where 1-900-Fuck-You tried to blackmail you into paying $500 or they would publicly identify you in court documents as having called them (with a fake credit card).
Phone records are not automatically released in civil cases either. I can't get AT&T to give me identifying or usage data on 702-555-0109 without a judge telling them to. But the problem we see here is MM is expecting to get extensive identification and usage data outside of a court. Likely because the court will say no, given the history of IP-capture-based lawsuits.
The history of these situations (Phone vs IP) suggests that Comparing them is comparing apples to oranges.
I know, and Mike knows that Information society has evi applications. That is why Techdirt spends so much time covering bad laws and bad actions by public and private entities, to highlight and inform us on how our information is being abused. I take what Techdirt exposes for me and display that same activism out to my friends and colleagues. A subpoena is different though, then what MM is looking for right now. Which is avoiding the court altogether and jumping straight to the blackmail without the pesky court asking questions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: So you're saying ISP records shouldn't be like phone records.
Rest assured, you'll see this argument again from OOTB, but the statement is still insightful*1000.
Discounting jury nullification, the jury weighs the evidence (and the veracity of the witnesses testimony of that evidence.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: So you're saying ISP records shouldn't be like phone records.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: So you're saying ISP records shouldn't be like phone records.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Caved
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Caved
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Caved
And I'm sure that lots of money, figures and the government have nothing to do with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Caved
Yeah, right, and if you believe that I've got a bridge to sell you.
The big reason the ISP's caved and became yet another arm of hollywood's copyright enforcement division is because Biden 'suggested' that if they didn't, they'd start seeing some less than pleasant regulations headed their way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Have fun cleaning up after John Steele's mess, Colette.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can non-law enforcement entities demand phone companies release phone records? ie, if I feel that another party has done some wrong to me, can I force their phone company to hand over his phone records?
Not the same thing, chief.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How about some mother fucking due process? If you break it down it looks like this.
Due - Owed
Process - A process in which all the rules are fucked up and enough legal mumbo jumbo to make any normal persons head spin.
When you put the two together it clearly states you're OWED A GOOD ASS FUCKING FROM THE COURT FIRST. After that fucking is finished the other party is free to get some sloppy seconds.
I'm sure ought_of_tha_blew would agree with me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Content viewed by Defendants"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Content viewed by Defendants"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Content viewed by Defendants"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "Content viewed by Defendants"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "Content viewed by Defendants"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/01/11/verizon-has-already-started-warning-pirate s-heres-what-the-first-strike-looks-like/#comment-9155
6 Strikes because Copyright is more important than due process or rights.
We have a crazy man running a country playing with nukes, and we are spending more time protecting the content cartels than citizens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
People are useless once a nuke hits, but copyright will still last 70 years more even after a nuclear strike. Think about all the money you could make after you've been blown to bits!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thank God
Now at least, Malibu Media had the forethought to take advantage of this opportunity and I for one only want to know how fast we can get this over to Judge Wright's court calendar.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By dragging these nonlegal notices into the courts the door is open to challenge the reality of them.
As 6 Strikes holds account holders responsible for acts they may not have knowledge of expect a ruling from the courts reaffirming that a name on the bill does not make them responsible under the copyright act and you have to actually prove who did it.
A nice explosion from this will be a Federal Court declaring 6 Strikes to be flawed in the court system.
As they like to pretend these notices are legal in some fashion, this will hurt the system and hopefully get enough people pissed off enough to kill it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brigham & Colette Field - Lipscomb - Lipscomb, Baker & Eisenberg P.L- Malibu Media LLC & Streisand effect
http://dockets.justia.com/search?query=Malibu+Media%2C+LLC+
Cases filed matching "Malibu Media, LLC "
Display as Search Results
Cases 1 - 20 of 701
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]