Judge To Allow More Evidence Filed Against Team Prenda, Despite Vehement Objections From Prenda
from the judge-isn't-buying-it dept
On Wednesday, lawyer Morgan Pietz asked Judge Otis Wright if he could file some additional evidence in the big Prenda showdown case. Pietz, of course, is the lawyer who had been representing some of the anonymous Does that Prenda Law was targeting in various cases, and who was the lawyer who successfully convinced Judge Otis Wright that Prenda Law and its associated lawyers were up to highly questionable activities. The key thing was that Pietz pointed out that he had important evidence that Steele has admitted to having an "ownership interest in several of Prenda's clients" including AF Holdings. He also wants to file a response to the ridiculous character assassination of Alan Cooper, as well as the related filings by Team Prenda.the outrageous attacks made on the real Alan Cooper are shameful. However, they are also easily discredited, and undersigned counsel would appreciate an opportunity to do so. Similarly, the other two declarations submitted by Mr. Duffy and Prenda also have problems, which undersigned counsel would like to briefly address and refute.Pietz also wants to dig deeper into some of the actual legal issues associated with the cases at hand that go beyond just attorney misconduct, noting that some of these are important issues that shouldn't be lost in the focus on Prenda's conduct.
Not surprisingly, Prenda Law / Paul Duffy very quickly shot back, with a filing telling the court, rather vehemently, that it should not allow Pietz to file such things. It notes that the case itself is now a criminal investigation (interesting...) and thus opposing attorneys from the civil case no longer have a role in the case, because they're not "disinterested prosecutors." It then points out that Pietz is clearly not disinterested. Basically, it argues that Pietz is biased against copyright enforcement (ha!) and is just seeking to "pad his bill." Further, they claim that the evidence is "vague and inadmissable" (which some might interpret to mean "it says stuff we don't like very much, which hurts our credibility.") Very quickly after that, both Paul Hansmeier and John Steele filed "me too!" statements with the court, both saying that they "join" Prenda's objection.
Not surprisingly, these protests went for naught as Judge Wright very quickly approved Peitz's request to file the evidence by Tuesday April 16th. If you hadn't figured it out by now (and unless you've been living under a rock, you have figured it out by now), Judge Wright simply doesn't believe anything coming out of Team Prenda these days.
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: evidence, john steele, morgan pietz, otis wright, paul duffy, paul hansmeyer
Companies: prenda, prenda law
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I've been waiting for one of the **AA's to file a motion in this circus. While they might not approve of the content, people, etc. they need to stick up for the 'technology' of using snapshots to prove guilt.
Six Strikes is already going to take a beating if MM gets the data to use in their cases, and a hardcore public beating of our 'friends' at Prenda doing something that looks awfully close to how Six Strikes operates people might loose faith in the corporate law system.
At some point I'd hope Prentenda (f'it I can't help myself anymore) et al would give up on the magic hand wave trying to pretend the princess is in another castle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, that won�t happen because the MPAA and RIAA don�t want to toss their hats into the same ring as�
� �pornography (remember that the Prenda cases started over porn)
� �a spectacularly-failed copyright lawsuit that could bring down the entire �shakedown� scheme
� �the potential felons who �masterminded� said failed lawsuit
I�d bet on the MPAA and RIAA sending Judge Wright a giant thank-you note before it ever stepped into this circus on the side of Prenda Law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Trust me I am well versed in Pretenda and copyright trolling.
Defamation lawsuit x 3 - Achievement Unlocked.
Avatar and Nym in Court Records - Achievement Unlocked.
Coining the phrase Pretenda - Achievement Unlocked.
I'm also aware of the levels the **AAs will sink to, giving the family time to grieve their dead father they had sued, and then wanted to depose the rest of the family.
Not only is Pretendas splash in the media drawing attention to the tech, Malibu Media requesting 6 Strikes notices for potential does and other usage patterns will hurt.
Besides they can use CCI to try and prop up the snapshot methodology and stay removed. (well other than the whole they are on the board thing)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Chances are that the final ruling will be coloured against Prenda on all accounts. It is much better to choose another case with a more "sensible hush hush" judge and a case with at least some prospect of going their way in the grand scheme.
It would be the thing of nightmares for them to risk "bad" precedence on a crappy case like this and having to buy changes to the laws to get a new chance. That is just bad business!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
After a very long time there are more 'mainstream' websites covering the hijinks and asking questions about the methodology used in these cases and looking at the unfairness of a $150K bludgeon being used for films that cost $20K to make.
Rulings will hurt, but putting into the discussion that the methods that were used don't meet a legal standard will harm how 6 Strikes operates in the public perception. It is a perception game and no one at CCI wants a public asking pointed questions about how their system can't even meet basic legal requirements to be legitimate.
Pretendas business model poisoned the well, and that poison is spreading. I live in the hope that I can warn more people to stop drinking the water.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Achievements of this case
Judgement Day - Because nothing is worse than making a federal judge your worst enemy...
Identity theft - Because your legacy in history is assured when you have to rely on federal crimes to move forward.
Created here...
Hosted here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Achievements of this case
Pissing off the wrong Does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Achievements of this case
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Achievements of this case
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I hope not but the Copyright side stand to make a lot of losses here as Judge Otis Wright has already made clear by tossing out all tracking as not identifying the infringer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
//straight from the yeah-right,-as-if department//
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Same here. I thought they might have gained a modicum of clue when they plead the Fifth, as stupid as that move was. Now, they're just digging a deeper and deeper hole, and handing the judge more and more ammo (or is it rope?).
Prenda, the slo-mo train wreck that just keeps on giving. Quite a show.
Good on Pietz for failing to let go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well that's my informed reading of the reply anyway
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ms Rosing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ms Rosing
The thing is, however, that her clients keep trying to add an extra "SHOCK!" twist to each action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Ms Rosing
I'd love to see one of those, you only see it on tv and in movies, lawyer moments where she just says f' this and resigns on the spot in court. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Curious...
I'm assuming the first, as if they were being charged with something, that would almost require a separate case to be filed, and it's not like they haven't screwed up and/or tried to pull a legal trick like this before.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Curious...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Curious...
Even then though, that would seem to be a separate set of charges altogether, which would again require a separate court-case, not affecting this one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Curious...
After all while it is likely that the Judge will file criminal charges that has not yet been decided and the Judge may yet rule against it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Curious...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Curious...
Clinging to the idea that its a criminal case lets them try and eject Morgan from adding anything to the record.
It lets them argue that this court room is the improper forum to be asking any questions.
They won't clear up any questions about who their client is, some seriously basic facts, to avoid saying anything that could be used against them.
Lots of courts and Federal acronyms have been spotted surfing not only the wise analysis posted elsewhere but FCT and DTD reading articles and docs. Bad things are coming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do they have any credibility left?
[ 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 ]
Re: Re:
Or the "evidence" of a technology expert who claims the method is perfect cause its hard for copyright holders to police those rights and they'd need 167,000 (?) investigators to do the job?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
If of course it is shown that the "Alan Cooper" previously in court is not mentally deficient and his identity was stolen then they will claim they were deceived, deceive they will tell the court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
They spent more time trying to point out it didn't matter WHO or what signed the transfers because the owner signed to assign the rights and that is all that mattered.
They wanted to throw onto a court record a bunch of claims that Mr. Cooper is unbalanced so they can pull that record to show the Judge in the defamation case and the ID theft case that he has problems... its a cute little trick to muddy the waters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SCO Dogs
Plus, now it seems like we're entering the Reservoir Dogs phase of the drama.
There's not enough popcorn in the world...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The only thing coming out of Team Prenda is we plead the 5th.
Their lawyers are making claims about everyone else being naughty, but still are unwilling to answer simple questions about what should be clear facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]