Totally Pointless Lawsuit Accusing Mobile Carriers Of Being P2P File Sharers Dismissed; Plaintiffs Say They're Happy

from the um,-guys,-you-lost-big-time dept

Last summer, we wrote about an incredibly poorly thought out lawsuit, by a company named Luvdarts, developers of MMS content, suing the mobile operators, because MMS can be forwarded from a recipient to another person. The company claimed that the big mobile operators were no different than file sharing networks, like Limewire or Gnutella, because each forwarding of content was infringement. As we pointed out at the time, this made no sense. It was a silly argument that was really being put forth by a guy named Max Davis, who has an equally silly plan to add compulsory licensing to MMS content, and this lawsuit was an incredibly weak attempt to push the mobile operators into negotiating. Instead, as we predicted, it's been dismissed by the courts for failure to state a claim. The dismissal was with prejudice, meaning that the court doesn't want to see them again on this. The press release linked above is kind of amusing, because it has the folks behind the lawsuit claiming that they're happy about this result and planning to appeal. Guys, you just got laughed out of court, because this lawsuit makes no sense. Appealing isn't going to fix that.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    xenomancer (profile), Mar 25th, 2011 @ 4:36am

    "Guys, you just got laughed out of court, because this lawsuit makes no sense. Appealing isn't going to fix that."

    But, it could be damn funny. Imagine if they find another judge willing to quote star wars: "the force is not strong with your case, dismissed you are!"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 25th, 2011 @ 4:42am

    Of course they are happy. Some people actually enjoy being spanked. In fact, I believe there is a whole industry based around that concept...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), Mar 25th, 2011 @ 4:59am

    Interesting line of thought

    "We told you to shut up and get the hell out."

    "Being quieted and removed only strengthens our negotiating position. Now, we've got them just where we want them: annoyed and antagonistic.

    Imagine if we'd been jailed or killed! The cellphone companies would have no choice but to implement our licensing!"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 25th, 2011 @ 5:08am

    Mabye's they be appealing cuz dey don't want to pay for the defendants lawyering.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    icon
    Killer_Tofu (profile), Mar 25th, 2011 @ 6:05am

    AC Argument #3.2

    "There must be more to this story. I feel mike is withholding information." [ AC's book of Anti-Mike, 3rd revision ]

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), Mar 25th, 2011 @ 6:15am

    Better

    Better sue the air - because infringing copies can be transmitted through it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 25th, 2011 @ 8:48am

    Perhaps they are trying to simply show how ridiculous lawsuits on P2P companies are?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    max (profile), Mar 25th, 2011 @ 3:48pm

    Hey Mike, long time no argue...I am happy to see you are paying attention to this precedent setting case. You laughed at us last summer mainly because you said the carriers had safe harbor. Did you see that defense presented by them? File sharing may be a push or pull model. Either way it is still file sharing. If you know about law then you would know that the Appellate Court is where most case law is established. If you really knew what you were talking about (the facts) you would know that the carriers have already begun to change their public policy through our efforts. We are a pro copyright organization while embracing technology. Why is it that you say "come up with new business models" and as we are doing just that you try to tear it down? Because it is not YOUR idea of a business model? Stay tuned buddy, you've got a lesson coming.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    xenomancer (profile), Mar 25th, 2011 @ 4:50pm

    Re: Better

    Better sue oxygen; it allows infringers to survive

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 25th, 2011 @ 5:20pm

    Re:

    "Why is it that you say "come up with new business models" and as we are doing just that you try to tear it down? Because it is not YOUR idea of a business model? Stay tuned buddy, you've got a lesson coming."

    Hahahaha from you? and your little do-nothing, "lets just recast the same exact business models in a slightly different form so WE can grab some cash" nu-business? Really? ok then. Cant wait to see how you TOTALLY change the business and put Mike in his PLACE!

    In case you missed it, I wont be holding my breath. I'll be too busy ignoring Yet Another Middleman Business Built On Excessive and Overbearing Copyright Monopolies (YAMBBOEOCM) while it fails utterly.

    But good luck with that....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    max (profile), Mar 25th, 2011 @ 7:21pm

    Re: Re:

    Yeah, well it is too bad you only have a few choices - respect the laws, change the laws or break the laws. What is your choice?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    The Devil's Coachman (profile), Mar 26th, 2011 @ 9:13am

    Max needs to change his name - to Min

    As in minimal intelligence, coming here and thinking that any thinking person is going to agree with his industry shilling. Step back, son, ya bother me!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 26th, 2011 @ 10:47am

    Re: Max needs to change his name - to Min

    haha...touche, well put coachman, coming here is like coming to a den of inequity (copyright haters)....if we ain't afraid to take on the wireless carriers you can bet we ain't afraid to debate the "thinking" copyright haters that think our ideas are stupid and uh hmmmm "of minimal intelligence".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    harbingerofdoom (profile), Apr 1st, 2011 @ 5:49pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    ill go with changing them glad to see you on board with that optioin.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This