Why Do Senators Keep Lying About What CISA Would Be Used For?

Inglewood Told To Pay $118k Of Taxpayer Money For Abusing Copyright Law To Silence A Critic

from the democracy! dept

Fri, Oct 9th 2015 10:36am — Mike Masnick

Remember the City of Inglewood, California? The city where mayor James Butts was so annoyed that an online critic, Joseph Teixeira, had made some mocking videos using clips from city council meetings, that he allotted $50,000 of taxpayer money to fund a lawyer to file an absolutely bogus copyright lawsuit against Teixeira? This lawsuit alleged that Teixeira somehow infringed on the copyright of the City by adding commentary to these videos. There was so much wrong with the lawsuit that it was a total embarrassment for the city and the lawyer, Joanna Esty, who claims to be a "seasoned" lawyer with expertise in intellectual property law.

The court did not take long in dismissing the lawsuit and benchslapping the city for filing the lawsuit in the first place. The court allowed Teixeira to seek legal fees, and while the city pushed back, the court has now told the city to pay another $117,741 in legal fees to Teixeira's lawyers, noting that the entire lawsuit was "objectively unreasonable."

Judge Michael Fitzgerald has another opportunity to smack Inglewood around for filing such a bogus lawsuit in the first place, and notes that it's pretty damn clear that the entire purpose behind this lawsuit was to silence a critic, not because of any legitimate belief that a copyright was being infringed.

It is, of course, impossible to know with certainty what prompted the City to bring this lawsuit. The City avers that its only motivation was to enforce the rights it believed it had in the videos.... But the Court is not persuaded. As Defendant rightly notes, the main justification of the Copyright Act is “the protection of the commercial interest of the author.”... California law, however, prohibits the City from charging anything more than the “direct costs of duplication” when providing public records.... Pecuniary gain, therefore, could not have been the motivating factor in filing this action. As the Court made clear at the hearing, the City’s most plausible purpose was to stifle Defendant’s political speech after he harshly criticized the City’s elected officials. As such, this factor weighs heavily in favor of an attorneys’ fees award.

At the hearing, counsel for Plaintiff implied that this Court was basing its ruling on the reaction of the press or the academic community. The Court does not do so.

The judge also notes that he's worried that, if left unpunished, Inglewood or other cities might do this again:

The Court is also persuaded that a fee award is necessary to deter future meritless litigations of this kind. The City argues that the attorneys’ fees “will have absolutely no deterrent effect” on a municipality that intends to file no future copyright lawsuits.... Even if true, the Court notes that deterrence is a broad value that is not limited to the individual litigants here. Indeed, a reasonable award of fees will serve to deter other entities, whether public or private, that contemplate bringing unreasonable suits to pressure an individual into abandoning protected activity.

So, between the original $50,000 allotted and this $117,741, that's an awful lot of taxpayer money being spent just to try to stifle someone's First Amendment rights. It kind of makes you wonder what they're doing with the rest of the taxpayer funds they have access to.

Inglewood v Teixeira Order on Attorneys Fees How Awkward (PDF)Inglewood v Teixeira Order on Attorneys Fees How Awkward (Text)

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: censorship, copyright, copyright as censorship, free speech, inglewood, james butts, joanna esty, joseph teixeira

28 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

limbodog (profile), 9 Oct 2015 @ 10:56am

Well I'm glad everyone learned their lesson!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DogBreath, 9 Oct 2015 @ 11:04am

Just another day of typical government malfeasance in action
So, between the original $50,000 allotted and this $117,741, that's an awful lot of taxpayer money being spent just to try to stifle someone's First Amendment rights. It kind of makes you wonder what they're doing with the rest of the taxpayer funds they have access to.

Based on their level of self-importance and incompetence, I'll bet it is mostly on this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TechDescartes (profile), 9 Oct 2015 @ 11:10am

Re: Lessons Learned
Yes, the City of Inglewood learned that Texeira's speech was free, for everyone but them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 11:21am

what a shame no judge has the balls to take a similar line against the various sections of the entertainment industries and Hollywood. perhaps there would be a diminishing of the ridiculous 'cease and desist' threats those industry heads issue, knowing full well they have not the slightest right to do so
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 9 Oct 2015 @ 11:31am

4 comments and no jokes?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 11:31am

Cadillac v Chevy
From the Judge Fitzgerald's order:
The City maintains that the hours billed by Defendant’s attorneys are grossly inflated. The City primarily takes issue with the time spent on drafting the motion to dismiss and related papers. Mr. Laidman alone appears to have spent over 130 hours on the motion to dismiss . . .

The Court in no way wishes to criticize Mr. Laidman and does not suggest that the hours worked were excessive in terms of producing a polished final product. Nonetheless, the City cannot be forced to pay for a Cadillac if a Chevy would have sufficed. Moreover, based on the Court’s own experience as an associate, this is precisely the sort of case in which a lawyer might feel free to work more hours since the client might not get stuck with a bill. . . .

Therefore, the Court determines that 45 hours should be subtracted from the total time billed by Mr. Laidman in the final loadstar calculation.
(Emphasis added; citations omitted.)

I would agree that the City should not be forced to pay for a chartered helicopter when an automobile would have sufficed. But neither should defendants run the risk of getting stuck with a Trabant. When hauled into an American court, defendants may reasonably expect an American-made car.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 9 Oct 2015 @ 11:34am

Re: 4 comments and no jokes?
I'm so disappointed with my fellow TD readers I hit enter by mistake!

Come on, the name is James Butts people!

Ahem.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 11:52am

In the city of Hawthorne on Hawthorne blvd there is a spaceX monumental statue and there is (or at least used to be) speakers surrounding it that say taking pictures is prohibited and you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if you do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 11:55am

Re: Re: 4 comments and no jokes?
James might be the Butts of his own joke, maybe no one feels a need to 'crack' another one?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 12:38pm

Re: Re: 4 comments and no jokes?
Rupture is his middle name.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 12:40pm

Re: Re: Re: 4 comments and no jokes?
I'm sorry that was terrible, If I report my own post will it be deleted?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 12:44pm

Re: Cadillac v Chevy
Or at least a American-made foreign car.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 12:53pm

Re:
(this is a public display btw).

Here is a google street view link to it
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 12:53pm

Re: Re:
oops, forgot to include the link,

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9153596,-118.352397,3a,46.4y,348.72h,105.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4! 1sGJ1Qu38p7RAA89pX1hTcTw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Digitari, 9 Oct 2015 @ 1:15pm

Re: Re: 4 comments and no jokes?
That makes him "Jim Butts 2"I know a jim butts but in a different state. He's the Butt of many jokes tho...

(he tells jokes all the time)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
art guerrilla (profile), 9 Oct 2015 @ 3:46pm

Re: Re: Lessons Learned
there is no free (as in beer) speech any longer, its all fee speech, babykins, you got to pay to play...

besides, i'm sure The They (tm) have learned their 'lesson', and will just find some other 'legal' means of exacting their revenge...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 6:40pm

And this is relevant how?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Oct 2015 @ 7:20pm

Re:
Penalization of copyright law abuse is extremely relevant, because it rarely ever happens.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Oct 2015 @ 5:39am

Esty=""Copyright Troll"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

karot�u (profile), 10 Oct 2015 @ 9:18am

Karot
Karot işleri – Karot uygulamaları bir çok alanda kullanılmakta ve çözümler sunmaktadır.

Karot işi, matkap şeklindeki karotcu makinaları olarak adlandırılan makinalarla yapılmaktadır. İşlevi nedeniyle bir çok alanda ihtiyaca cevap veren uygulamadır. Bu makineler ile beton yapıdan silindir şeklinde parça çıkarılmaktır. Buna karot alma denilmektedir.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Oct 2015 @ 3:37pm

The internet is dying a slow death, but the lawyers aren't done bleeding dry the goose that laid the golden egg, yet. I hope they are happy with what they have accomplished and guess they will have to revert to chasing ambulances again when it is all said and done.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 11 Oct 2015 @ 9:15am

What's really sad is that a simple little court case like this costs as much as buying a house.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
El Mariachi (profile), 11 Oct 2015 @ 9:14pm

Re: Hawthorne
I imagine that has more to do with discouraging people from standing there taking pictures in the middle of the street where there’s no stoplight or crosswalk.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 12 Oct 2015 @ 7:05am

Re: Re: Hawthorne
If so, then why don't they just enforce the already existing laws against standing in the middle of the street?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John85851 (profile), 12 Oct 2015 @ 11:57am

Re:
Is this spam or not? The rough Google Translation is:
"Core work - Core applications are used in many areas and offers solutions.
Carotene work is done with machines called karotc machines shaped drill. The function is responsive to the needs of applications in many fields due. These machines will be removed with the cylindrical part of the concrete structure. This is called coring."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 12 Oct 2015 @ 3:57pm

Re: Cadillac v Chevy
No worries, a Trabant isn't road-legal in the US. I don't think defendents can reasonably expect an American-made car (why would that be a reasonable expectation?), but they can reasonably expect a car that is road-legal and in good working order.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 12 Oct 2015 @ 3:58pm

Re: Re:
It's obviously spam. But even if it's not, it's still radially off-topic and deserving of a report just for that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
El Mariachi (profile), 12 Oct 2015 @ 4:53pm

Re: Re: Re: Hawthorne
Because a recorded announcement saying “move along, nothing to see here” is a hell of a lot cheaper than assigning a cop to hang around the statue full time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]