"Is this the judge's job? Or is this the job of the defense? If the judge felt there was fraud here,"
Lawyers are officers of the court. It's the judge's job to investigate if he thinks that the lawyers aren't behaving as officers of the court should, and to impose sanctions if he thinks they broke the rules. In this case, the fraud involved lying to the court, so it's exactly the sort of fraud the judge should be concerned with.
Lutz could say that the only contact info he has for Cooper is a phone number, and that Cooper simply isn't answering his phone or responding to messages left on his answering machine. Of course, if he said that, the judge would want to know the phone number, would be able to determine the address the phone number belonged to, and from there...
If he wanted the Cooper issue to permanently go away, he could do a variation on the above: the only contact info he had for Cooper was his phone number, and that number was on his smartphone. Except that, oops, his smartphone got damaged to the point of destruction (or got stolen), and double oops, he never synced up his smartphone with his computer. So sorry, your honor, but Cooper is now and forevermore unserviceable.
Of course, the second would certainly get him contempt of court, but if the alternative is worse...
By default, BitTorrent trackers record the source IP address from the request as the actual address of the peer to be delivered to others. But, some BitTorrent tracker implementations support an optional extension to the peer request message that allows requesting clients to specify a different IP address that the tracker should record in its list of peers instead. This is intended to provide support for proxy servers and peers/trackers behind the same NAT.
in which Barbara Streisand sued a photographer for taking an aerial photograph of her house, as part of a project to photograph the entire California coastline from a helicopter (to study the impact of erosion). It was crazy to think of that as a privacy violation, and the court clearly agreed, siding with the photographer over Streisand.
Wasn't Streisand's issue that her house was labelled as being her house, rather than it being anonymous like all the other photos?