Did FBI Counterterrorism Agent Reveal That Feds Now Record All Phone Calls?
USTR Special 301 Report Doesn't Even Mention Germany Trampling Fair Use

John Steele Plans To Appeal Judge Wright's Order; Says Judge Is 'No Fan Of IP Law'

Say That Again

from the no,-he's-not-a-fan-of-abusing-IP-law dept

Tue, May 7th 2013 2:30pm — Mike Masnick
While Judge Otis Wright may have been careful to set the financial punishment for Prenda at just less than how much it will cost to appeal, it appears that will not stop John Steele from appealing. Apparently, Steele doesn't seem to recognize that speaking to the press given his current situation may not be that wise, because he told porn news publication Xbiz the following about his reaction to the ruling:
Steele on Tuesday told XBIZ that he plans on appealing Wright's order with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"Obviously we don't agree on the ruling," Steele said. "Judge Wright based his order on an eight-minute hearing where there was no testimony, no evidence introduced. Clearly Judge Wright does not like this type of litigation and he's no fan of intellectual property law."
Actually, Judge Wright did not base his order on just that eight-minute hearing (I believe it was actually 12 minutes, but who's counting?). He based it on all of the piles upon piles of evidence presented before that, combined with Steele and his partners' decision to refuse to testify. For Steele to now complain that "there was no testimony, no evidence introduced" is pretty laughable, since the reason there was no such information brought forth at that particular hearing was mainly due to Steele and his partners' own decision. However, there was plenty of testimony and evidence introduced previously, and Wright's order was based on that. The whole point of that last hearing was to give Steele, Hansmeier and Duffy a chance to respond to and refute that evidence. They did not do so. To now complain about it is pretty funny.

Separately, the argument that Judge Wright "is no fan of intellectual property law" is equally silly. Wright seems pretty clearly to be annoyed, not at intellectual property law itself, but by the clear abuse of those laws.
Hide this

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: appeals, john steele, otis wright
Companies: prenda, prenda law

72 Comments

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

Reader Comments

The First Word

“
If we're lucky enough to get Alex Kozinski as the judge in appeals court, the hearing should be _very_ entertaining.

I think I would *pay* to see that...
—Mike Masnick
 ”

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    fogbugzd (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 2:16pm

    I don't know what Judge Wright thinks about IP law. On the other hand I am certain that he is no fan of attorneys who lie to the court, present false evidence, and generally abuse the legal system.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 2:41pm

      Re:

      "I am certain that he is no fan of attorneys who lie to the court, present false evidence, and generally abuse the legal system."

      Yes this is what they got in trouble for not for IP law but for abusing the law to fit their agendas.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        crade (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 2:52pm

        Re: Re:

        Unfortunately, it looks more like they got in trouble because they didn't follow the letter of the law when abusing the law to fit their agendas. They are hardly getting thrown in the joint for their extortion scheme, either. Doesn't seem like much of a deterent at all so far.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        crade (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 2:56pm

        Re: Re:

        From what I can tell, if you want to run an extortion scheme like this using IP law, just don't lie to judges about which cases you are working on and make sure to get proper company representatives, cross your I's, dot your T's, when you extort away. Otherwise you might have to pay a fine, but nowhere close to what you got from your extortion.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      out_of_the_blue, 7 May 2013 @ 3:04pm

      Re:

      Bingo!


      "I'm probably an imposter."

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jessie (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 2:33pm

    Fan

    Hmm. Steele doesn't sound happy. Guess he's not a fan of Star Trek.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Somewhat Anonymous, 7 May 2013 @ 2:36pm

    Er, What?

    Not a lawyer, but isn't John talking to the press about a case where he's plead the fifth a bad idea?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 5:09pm

      Re: Er, What?

      No, cuz he's not under oath when talking to the press, so he can lie all he wants and not face perjury charges later.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 6:50pm

        Re: Re: Er, What?

        He may not face perjury charges for speaking to the press but his statements CAN be used against him and he will likely be facing a lot more serious charges than perjury. RICO is a whole different ball game. It's STILL not smart in his position.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Nigel (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 2:41pm

    Awesome!

    For those of us paying attention this is only a good thing. I am not quite done laughing at that asshat.

    Nigel

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Chosen Reject (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 3:20pm

      Re: Awesome!

      While I enjoy watching these guys get put to the fire, I can't help but wonder why they haven't left the country. There are several decent countries that probably wouldn't extradite them for the things they could be charged with. Either they are really stupid, or extremely confident that they will be exonerated. It's not likely they're going to be getting a lot of business as lawyers after this anyway, so having to learn a new skill set in a different country isn't much different than staying here.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        That One Guy (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 4:29pm

        Re: Re: Awesome!

        It's entirely possible that there are a few too many people interested in the case, and therefor them, for them to easily slip away like that.

        After all, lying to a judge is one thing, trying to slip out of the country in the middle of a very well known trial is something all together different, because while the first might get them in trouble(and in this case it appears to have done so), the second would almost certainly bring down all sorts of less than pleasant attention on them.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Chosen Reject (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 5:09pm

          Re: Re: Re: Awesome!

          Yes, but if you know that what you have done is illegal, and that it's being referred to the authorities, then why don't they just leave. They're not on bail. That I know of, nothing is stopping them from taking a vacation to France and once there asking for asylum a la Roman Polanski.

          I've never done this (nor felt the need to) so I don't know how hard it would actually be.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            That One Guy (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 5:19pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Awesome!

            True enough I suppose, now that the trial is over they could just skip the country, but it's entirely possible that their egos are so big that they honestly still think that they'll be able to talk their way out of the massive amount of trouble that's about to be dumped on them, and if that's the case, I cannot wait until they find out how wrong they are.

            [ link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 6:58pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Awesome!

              Exactly they are bullshitters of the highest order that think that they can bullshit their way out of anything. They are poker player's that don't know when to fold.

              [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 2:42pm

    IRS etc.

    Is John Steele forgetting about the referrals, while trying to attack Otis Wright?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 2:44pm

      Re: IRS etc.

      Here's the thing Judge Otis Wright can possibly lay more smackdown now.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 2:58pm

        Re: Re: IRS etc.

        I was thinking even if Steele wins the appeal, the federal attack dogs have been set on him, and are not subject to recall.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    crade (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 2:47pm

    "The judge based his ruling on an eight minute hearing where [We all refused to testify on the grounds that the answers would incriminate us]"

    "Clearly he doesn't like this type of litigation..."
    hehe

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Beech, 7 May 2013 @ 4:17pm

      Re:

      well, to be a stickler, pleading the 5th doesn't automatically mean you're guilty and don't want to incriminate yourself. But when you're a lawyer in a hearing with an irate judge who is asking you to "show cause" that you're in the right for filing a lawsuit.....yeah, pretty much mean's you're guilty.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        jackn, 7 May 2013 @ 4:32pm

        Re: Re:

        I think thats only true for criminal cases; whisc, at the the time wasnt the case.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 5:33pm

        Re: Re:

        The amazing thing is Steele seems to be of the opinion that pleading the fifth automatically lets him off the hook. Steele is the epitome of standing in the middle of the road for no reason and filing a lawsuit when a car runs you over.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        crade (profile), 8 May 2013 @ 8:40am

        Re: Re:

        I'm far from familiar with U.S. law, and I realize the 5th has multiple parts to it, but how is it possible to be compelled to be a witness against yourself if you haven't got any knowledge of your own guilt to disclose?

        Are you allowed to hide truths that are not testimony against yourself because you think someone might misconstrue them as being such?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Ben S (profile), 8 May 2013 @ 10:37am

          Re: Re: Re:

          That's a grey area, not sure if the 5th amendment covers that, though it might. Realistically, you can plead the 5th for any reason at all, even if you aren't technically guilty. The reason for this is that probing into the reasons for pleading the 5th would be trying to force the person to incriminate themselves. You'd have to provide solid evidence that the answer to the question could not possibly have incriminated the person giving testimony to be able to levy any form of punishment.

          For example, a person could testify in court in defense of some one who was definitely guilty of a crime, then plead the 5th when asked certain questions in order to deflect suspicion from the accused, onto them. You could try and question them as to why they plead the 5th, but they would respond by just pleading the 5th some more. How are you going to prove the answers to the questions can't possibly be seen as incriminating? That would be a hard thing to do, and I don't see it happening. The end result would be that a person can plead the 5th for any reason they want with out fear of any form of punishment.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            crade (profile), 9 May 2013 @ 8:51am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Oh ok, so basically it covers the case when your testimony could "seem" to point to your guilt even though you aren't guilty as well.

            [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 2:49pm

    These comments just go to show that the entertainment industry, and the lawyers the hire to represent their "cause", may understand the internet conceptually, but they clearly have no grasp of it experientially.

    For years the industry has managed to thrive buy playing a convoluted shell game. so that one hand is never aware of what the others are doing. Their lawyers apparently of like mind. Unfortunately, the internet is a perfect foil for such efforts as it allows the collection and dissemination of information that pulls the rug back on their dirty little activities.

    And this is why they hate the internet.

    Because for all their talk of "morality", of fairness, and of defending the "rights" of creators, when you really correlate their actions it becomes very clear how inherently dishonest, deceptive, and dishonorable these people really are.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    S. T. Stone, 7 May 2013 @ 2:50pm

    Out of the Blue coming in to defend Steele in 3…2…1…

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 2:56pm

    The judge even cited precedent in his ruling specifically regarding taking a defendant's silence in court as a negative... And he also warned them during the hearing that remaining silent would allow him to draw his own conclusions based on the evidence presented.

    The appeals court hearing should be short and entertaining as well.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 3:02pm

      Re:

      If we're lucky enough to get Alex Kozinski as the judge in appeals court, the hearing should be _very_ entertaining.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Mike Masnick (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 3:10pm

        Re: Re:

        If we're lucky enough to get Alex Kozinski as the judge in appeals court, the hearing should be _very_ entertaining.

        I think I would *pay* to see that...

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Spointman (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 3:04pm

    The closest thing I can think of is that Steele's lawyer wanted to present something like 45 minutes of legal arguments, but the judge shut her down pretty quickly, saying he's not interested in that. Maybe that's what Steele meant?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Glen, 7 May 2013 @ 3:09pm

    These guys don't disappoint. I'll say that. How much smoke can they blow up anyone and everyone's ass and think they can get away with it?

    Kettle corn, here I come!!!

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Maxwell (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 3:30pm

    The Next Generation

    If today's judges are amusing themselves in their rulings with strong cultural references of their time, which i find awesome, how long until we see rulings incorporating "lol", "roflcopter","umadbro?!" and much more from the internet and video game culture ?

    I wonder if judges in Japan make anime references in their rulings... :P

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    anon456, 7 May 2013 @ 3:39pm

    Chutzpah

    I think this post understates the chutzpah implicit in Steele's comment here -- not only was there "no testimony" because Steele chose to invoke the 5th Amend, but, since this is a civil case, the judge is ALLOWED to draw inferences from that silence.

    To berate the judge for not hearing testimony in that circumstance is pretty remarkable.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    iCleverUserName (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 3:56pm

    I am convinced Steele & Co go to bed

    every night asking themselves how they can be bigger douchebags tommorrow

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Art, 7 May 2013 @ 3:56pm

    What can he appeal?

    Wouldn't this appeal be more about challenging the finding of facts by the judge? If that is the case wouldn't Steele have to present the information that he plead the 5th on to have a chance at winning the appeal? It doesn't seem like appealing the fees is very likely to go anywhere. Talk about really trying to put himself in a worse place.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Lurker Keith, 7 May 2013 @ 3:58pm

    Know your enemy

    I have a feeling Steele is playing right into Judge Wright's hands. Referring things to everyone, in addition to the sanction, just makes it a Xanatos Gambit.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Rikuo (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 4:13pm

      Re: Know your enemy

      You're lucky I'm off work tomorrow, otherwise I'd reach through the internet and smack you, for just leaving that link lying about, with no warning signs. Seriously, haven't you heard by now how dangerous TVTropes is? How it sucks you in and won't let you go? One time I went on it, and when I finally somehow managed to get off it, my previously fuzz-free face now had several days growth on it.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Lurker Keith, 7 May 2013 @ 4:34pm

        Re: Re: Know your enemy

        I've heard rumors about how it traps people there, but have never experienced it myslef. It only keeps me there when I have no reason to leave & allow it to keep me there (mostly when I'm trying to kill time).

        Also, before I click any link, I check the status bar at the bottom of the browser, to see where it goes. I don't follow links blind. I assumed anyone using TechDirt would know to do that.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ferel (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 4:38pm

      Re: Know your enemy

      God... damn... you...

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 4:34pm

    Its like he is the Black Knight of Monty Python fame.

    Its just a flesh wound!
    I can fight you still!

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Zem, 7 May 2013 @ 4:49pm

    Huff and Puff

    Saying your going to appeal to the press and actually doing it are two different things. The press bit is more about buying time, the kind you dont have to pay for.

    I suspect this will never go to appeal. What I do expect is to see a rush of corporate and personal bunkrupcy. I only hope that they trust their wives.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ben S (profile), 8 May 2013 @ 10:48am

      Re: Huff and Puff

      I like that reference. It's been a while since I've seen that show. I should watch it again some time.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 5:25pm

    Yesterday I posted hoping that Prenda would chomp down on the bait and appeal. While this isn't as apoplectic as I wished it would be, it's a promising start. Maybe he'll get pornographers to publicly out themselves and file amicus curiae briefs in conjunction with Nazaire's full-retard responses.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      horse with no name, 7 May 2013 @ 6:36pm

      Re:

      They will appeal, and they will win. What the judge did was basically make himself into judge, jury, police force, investigator, prosecutor, and denied the defendants any time for defense, and then found them guilty of the changes that he himself came up with.

      If this stands, it would permit every judge in the land to railroad any lawyer that they don't agree with. That would suck.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        apauld (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 6:55pm

        Re: Re:

        You are so, so very wrong. If you would read the responses to you're idiocy in the comments from last nights thread you'd realize that. Or you're just *fn* stupid.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 6:58pm

        Re: Re:

        You're really trolling now, aren't you?

        Prenda Law wasn't the defendant in this case; Prenda Law was the plaintiff. Never mind the fact that they invoked their right to not testify, therefore permitting Wright to invoke his right to make do with whatever he was given. Considering that Prenda attempted to have him removed on the same baseless claims that he's "anti-IP" that set off big alarms that Prenda had something they didn't want Wright looking at.

        What - did the other shills refuse to troll on this topic on basis of principle, and you were forced to fill in for them? I suppose it's only fair that the best and brightest copyright enforcers have the best and brightest people to speak in their favour. Is that you, Nazaire?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          apauld (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 7:09pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          "Whore with no name" was hired by prenda to troll on techdirt. They found his "professional moron available" advertisement on Craigslist.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 7:14pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Yep!
          The dregs of the trolling/shill pool.
          Possibly "a horse with no name" is simply "an ass with no game".

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 7:52pm

        Re: Re:

        Prenda had it coming.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 7:56pm

        Re: Re:

        Your complaint is that a judge judged something. How amusing.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 9:15pm

        Re: Re:

        If they somehow won by discrediting the judge, what would that get them? If they win and go back to practicing law, do you think any judge in the US would let them in a courtroom for future cases knowing that they operate by launching incoherent personal attacks on judges when they lose?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 8 May 2013 @ 6:38am

        Re: Re:

        "What the judge did was basically make himself into judge, jury, police force, investigator, prosecutor, and denied the defendants any time for defense,"

        They took the 5th, boy.
        As should you.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 29 Aug 2016 @ 7:32pm

        Re: Re:

        Well, horse... you were right all along. They did appeal.

        And that's where your gold star ends, because not only did your heroes not win, you had to swap between several new pseudonyms, because your side got fucking owned!

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 May 2013 @ 6:53pm

    I like err love money....

    I recall that John claimed to be making $10k/day.

    $80k fine is 8 days of work, less than two weeks of work even considering he might only work on weekdays. Giving up 8 days of income to make bad situation go away or waste makes money to risk a much larger fine. Spock would conclude that the logical choice is to shut up and pay up.

    Either he lied and never made $10k/day or he is blinded by greed.
    The fact he has not split for a non-extradition country yet makes me believe that his greed will be his undoing.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 8 May 2013 @ 2:37am

      Re: I like err love money....

      Unfortunately for Steele(and fortunately for everyone else), Steele seems to think he can talk his way out of the current mess, not realizing that at most he'd be able to get out of the 80K fine, as the referrals to various government agencies, judges, state bars and all the other stuff the judge has done is not something an appeal can 'undo'.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Anon E. Mous (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 8:23pm

    When Steele was giving this "We will Appeal and be victorious" speech, was there circus music playing in the back round? You would have to think Steele must fell like a clown giving that statement knowing the noose is tightening around their necks.

    Steele and Prenda anytime they have been challenged have always put up the big front and Huffed and Puffed and got no where.

    What do these guys think the chances are that they will have success on appeal? We all know what happened in the Florida case where Lutz got questioned and Steele was there and when the Judge quizzed Lutz he didn't know this or that and couldn't name anyone at AF Holdings.

    The Judge in Florida declared that there was a fraud on the court and Steele & Duffy are facing sanctions there.

    Then you have the case in San Francisco Where Judge Chen in another Prenda case wants to see the signed ADR that bears "Salt Marsh" signature and that was supposed to be presented by April 29 2013.

    You can bet your ass now that Judge wright's report is going to go to other courts that are hearing any Prenda cases will be tuned into what is going on with Prenda and those involved in Prenda and their various cases.

    I would also have to believe that the Appeals court will be made aware of the other cases and the Judges rulings in them and Prenda actions concerning them.

    Sorry to say but these guys are history, I think Steele, Duffy Gibbs and Hansmeier will be sitting around the fire at the rail yard beside the boxcar, and relishing the days of old where they would chase ambulances and divorce cases and think of how good they had it as they are passing around that bottle of Scotch Ripple while waiting for the can of beans to finish cooking.

    These guys have been long on the fringe side of the law, from their copyright trolling suits to their other side line of filing as an intervener in class actions suits as an objector to a settlement... but willing to drop their objection for 30K ~ wink wink ~ nudge nudge.

    While they are gone for now I doubt we have seen the last of them, I hope the IRS and RICO will for once and all finish off these characters as they have crossed the line of right and wrong in my opinion.

    I thought Kevin Trudeau was the definition of a true criminal, but Kevin looks like a Saint compared to the Prenda gang!

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Steele's statements to AVN, 7 May 2013 @ 8:25pm

    http://business.avn.com/articles/legal/Sanctioned-Copyright-Lawyer-Says-He-Will-Appeal-Judge-s-Order -516284.html

    [...] Regarding the referral for sanctions imposed by Judge Wright, Steele said, “As far as the referrals to the various Bar associations, the Illinois Bar is well aware of this type of litigation. I have had inquiries from the office of the Illinois State Bar and have satisfied their requests in the past. I am confident that agencies like the IRS and the Illinois State Bar require actual evidence before taking action against someone.

    “Most importantly,” he added, “hundreds of judges across the country have ruled on these same cases and have thrown out the crazy conspiracy theories of people like Mr. Pietz [Morgan Pietz, a defendant’s attorney in the case] and groups like the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation). Content producers are still winning the vast majority of hearings in piracy cases, but it is inevitable that an anti-piracy attorney would have a case in front of a judge such as Mr. Wright.”

    [...] Steele told AVN that it is his understanding that Livewire Holdings, one of the entities identified by Judge Wright—by way of an actual Prenda relationship chart included in the order—as being a member of the Prenda family, “is filing multiple new cases this week."

    “Hopefully,” he added defiantly, “the pirate that got away in this matter will be caught and brought to justice down the road.” [...]

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anon E. Mous (profile), 7 May 2013 @ 9:11pm

      Re:

      I love this bit: Steele say’s LiveWire Holdings will be filing new cases this week! LMAO.. good luck with that John!

      And once again Steele is also saying he is not associated with Prenda Law…but yet he knows LiveWire Holdings is filing new cases. John ought to give Miss Cleo a call his Psychic abilities are uncanny!

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 May 2013 @ 1:45am

      Re:

      "Hundreds"? Which hundreds? Beryl Howell #1 to Beryl Howell #100? Do judges count if Prenda dismisses cases?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    G Thompson (profile), 8 May 2013 @ 1:54am

    Clearly Judge Wright does not like this type of litigation and he's no fan of intellectual property law."

    Clearly Judge Wright does not like this type of litigation and he's no fan of idiots practising law.

    There Mr Steele.. I fixed it for you

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Power Guy Rules (profile), 8 May 2013 @ 5:58am

    I don't get it. When will John Steelhole stop digging in his own deep grave?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 8 May 2013 @ 10:45pm

      Re:

      Probably about the same time someone takes the dirt/evidence he's so kindly providing and buries him with it.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]


Did FBI Counterterrorism Agent Reveal That Feds Now Record All Phone Calls?
USTR Special 301 Report Doesn't Even Mention Germany Trampling Fair Use
Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

Friday

19:39 Important Announcement: Techdirt Is Migrating To A New Platform (0)
More arrow

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.