Malibu Media Sanctioned Again For Bogus Copyright Abuse & Intimidation
from the start-adding-them-up dept
Back in September, we wrote about porn trolling company Malibu Media getting sanctioned for its ridiculous use of "Exhibit C" in its legal filings against people it accused of unauthorized downloads of porn content that it held the copyright on. Exhibit C was a completely useless exhibit that had nothing to do with the actual case at hand, but listed out other content that Malibu insisted the same person was downloading. None of the titles listed in Exhibit C were content where Malibu Media held the copyright. Instead, it was almost always titles of porn videos that would be considered very embarrassing for some people. The obvious intention: scare people into settling early to avoid having their names attached to a federal lawsuit where the records showed a long list of explicitly named movies that someone had downloaded. The court in the Western District of Wisconsin sanctioned Malibu's lawyers $200 per case, for a total of $2,200.Now, in a similar finding over in the Eastern District of Wisonsin, Judge Rudolph Randa has basically found the same thing and piled another $600 in sanctions for three cases in that district onto Malibu Media. Another $600 is pocket change of course, but there are a ton more of these cases out there, and if more and more courts start recognizing the game that Malibu is playing... we could be in for another Prenda-like domino effect. The court makes it clear that it recognizes that Malibu Media is abusing the judicial process to try to convince people to pay up. Hopefully more courts will begin to recognize this as well.
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: exhibit c, sanctions
Companies: malibu media
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Ah those double standards...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ah those double standards...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ah those double standards...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
To reference an established phrase while changing the words, especially if it's a short phrase, it works much better if you can keep the scansion the same. In this case, "Little" has two syllables, but "Mike" only has one, so the modified version doesn't scan the same way as the original.
It would work much better to use "Masnick" instead; that has two syllables, so it would keep the rhythm of "Chicken Little", and be much more likely to have people recognize what is meant.
Still very much worthy of reporting either way, of course.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Plus I really am not sure what he's trying to say, et cetera, see previous post.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As for the second, 'I'm off my meds, please ignore/report me', or something like that I'd guess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is basically extortion and blackmail in a legal forum, take the courts out of it and you have what it really is.
The fact that Malibu has an actual client that isn't a figment of John Steel's imagination or someone who looked after his dog is the difference maker on that front.
But this is the same thing Prenda was doing which is use the courts to extract settlements from people with the threat of a lawsuit. Honestly they are no better than Prenda.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So, the legal system (eventually, sorta) works against copyright abuse...
But using the courts for copyright abuses has been attended to without your help, and though far too small a punishment, that's due to the medieval guild that controls all lawyers, a judge rarely punishes any, which would make you another good topic of wide interest.
Just because a lot of people have gotten a lot of easy money off teh internets doesn't make it a plus overall: at the very least, the Internet enables spying on scale and in detail as never before.
14:02:26[p-5-8]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So, the legal system (eventually, sorta) works against copyright abuse...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So, the legal system (eventually, sorta) works against copyright abuse...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the minority that is worthy is utterly bizarre and typically from Japan
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is she willing to hand over thousands to those artists she stole from?
I guess it is only a bad thing when it happens to her, not when she does it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RICO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]