Prenda Lawyer Says Georgia Court Should Ignore Judge Wright's Order Because… Look! Hackers!

from the great-moments-in-lawyering dept

Remember Jacques Nazaire? He’s the local counsel for Prenda in a case in Georgia who was trying desperately to get the judge there to ignore Judge Wright’s order in California, which lays out how Prenda’s lawsuits are highly questionable, and likely against the law. He was so desperate that he said the judge should ignore the ruling in California because California recognizes gay marriage, among other differences, despite that having nothing to do with anything related to the actual case (which covers federal copyright laws, rather than state laws, and which was filed in the case to provide additional background, rather than as any sort of binding ruling).

Well, it appears that Nazaire seems to believe that if he just keeps telling the court crazier and crazier things, perhaps it will ignore Judge Wright’s ruling. The latest filing tries, once again, to give the judge in Georgia a reason to ignore Judge Wright’s ruling, but again it doesn’t make much sense. The filing is rambling and somewhat wacky, seemingly trying to argue that, even though Prenda and AF Holdings are implicated in both cases, they’re completely and totally unrelated. He also seems to argue that these filings are just designed to rack up higher billing fees. Note, for example, the slightly paranoid use of capital letters:

That motion was NOT written by the undersigned; nevertheless the defense has filed it in THIS docket apparently for two reasons. 1) to bill for the same and 2) to give THIS Court the impression that either the undersigned or a friend of his drafted and filed the same.

But where it gets really wacky is when Nazaire just starts tossing in totally random claims about hackers:

Why would the defendant in this case file a copy of a motion (ECF No. 31, Defendant’s Exhibit B) from the California case and into THIS docket when that motion has nothing to do with this case?

The undersigned does not know the answer to that question. However, it must be noted that defendants (not the one herein) in these types of cases, typically employ various crafty and intimidating schemes against prosecutors and plaintiff’s attorneys. A newspaper article mentioning other types of intimidation is attached hereto as Plaintiff’s Exhibit A.

What is Exhibit A, you ask? Why it’s a random story about hackers claiming to be a part of Anonymous hacking into Paypal. What does that have to do with anything? The answer is nothing.

Here’s what I find most incredible about Nazaire’s line of reasoning. It is basically “please ignore this other case where the same companies that I’m working for have been called out for fraud on the court, because that’s totally unrelated, even though they’re the same companies” while at the same time saying “we can’t trust anything the defense says because, hackers! And, as proof, here’s a random totally unrelated story about hackers.”

He goes on to suggest that these hackers are after him, because some moron sent him a stupid email.

Furthermore the undersigned has been personally harassed by these types of defendants (not the defendant in this instant case nor the individuals listed in Exhibit A) because of THIS case alone. (Please see Plaintiff’s Exhibit B attached hereto).

Exhibit B is a silly email from someone using the email address “evilpiratemonkey@gmail.com” saying:

You are about it get justifiably screwed by the justice system.

It’s nice to see.

You aren’t very smart, are you?

Of course, this is a stupid email by whoever sent it, but it’s hard to see how that’s necessarily “harassment,” nor does it show that the person who sent that email is one of “these types of defendants.” It’s just a stupid email from someone mocking Nazaire (the email address should have been a giveaway on that front).

Either way, if I’m the judge in this case, each of these filings only makes me more interested in whatever must be in Judge Wright’s order…





Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: prenda, prenda law

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Prenda Lawyer Says Georgia Court Should Ignore Judge Wright's Order Because… Look! Hackers!”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
43 Comments
Julian Perez (user link) says:

This strategy makes sense

If you consider that what they’re trying to do is construct a narrative all these bad things are happening to the Prenda people because they’re Copyright’s Greatest Heroes, and their opponents are anarchists who despise copyright law.

To them, the only real reason you could ever despise their obviously criminal endeavor is because you’re a filthy pirate downloading on the sly.

This has a basis in truth: I despise people using existing copyright law, using the courts as a type of extortion scheme, the majority of which are totally innocent people who settle not out of guilt but because it’s more convenient than legal fees.

What you have to remember is this: the Prenda people aren’t “bad lawyers” or a single aberration. They are able to do what they do as a direct result of outrageously backward copyright law.

What’s interesting about the Prenda people’s worldview is this: they view themselves as defenders of copyright law. They see themselves the same way that the wild-eyed fanatics at Copyhype do, or other blogs run by people without knowledge of economics or technology…as defenders of the law, unfairly railroaded and persecuted by “scary” tech types.

Have a look in the mirror, trolls, and luddites like Terrence Hart or Devin Hartline. These guys aren’t an aberration – they’re YOU.

Loki says:

Why would the defendant in this case file a copy of a motion (ECF No. 31, Defendant?s Exhibit B) from the California case and into THIS docket when that motion has nothing to do with this case?

Might have something to do with the fact that Judge Wright ordered it to be so? Why does it seem that most of the people on team Prenda struggle so much with simple reading comprehension (not to mention simple logic)? And how in the hell did these people manage to pass the bar?

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Well he filed something to claim it was all because of gay marriage, then he filed something blaming it all on Anonymous… I’m pretty much the poster child for that when it comes to Prenda… (see the exhibits in the defamation cases and I’m quoted a few times in the actual filing.)

Maybe the ‘fame’ went to my head?

Anon E. Mous (profile) says:

Does Prenda hire there Lawyers from Craiglist or something? This guy perfectly fits Prenda’s modus operandi perfectly.

Lets have a checklist of his submission:

1) Submit arguments and exhbits that have nothing to do with case at hand. Check

2) Take Federal Judge’s order filed with the court that involves Prenda case and deny that it relates to said Prenda case. Check

3) Blame opposing council for difficulties in arguing said case. Check

4) Ask Judge to ignore submissions by anyone not affiliated with Prenda. Check

By chance before he became a lawyer , was he entertaining at kids parties and making balloon animals and honking a horn while wearing big red floppy shoes? Just curious.

GeneralEmergency (profile) says:

Announcing the next EXHIBIT B contest!!!

.

Hi there Boys and Girls!

Why let EvilPirateMonkey@gmail.com have all the fun and glory? You too can get included in Jacques Nazaire’s next wacky court filing just by dashing off a hastily composed missive.

Here’s all you need to do:
1) Think up crazy or insulting or even completely factual stuff.
2) Email it off to Jacques Nazaire.
3) Sit back and bask in the resulting fame.

Just think about it! You could be the very next winner* like EvilPirateMonkey@gmail.com in the hilarious Prenda Circus of Copyright Litigation Shame!

(*Contest not legal in Rhode Island and Cochise County, Az.)

.

sophisticatedjanedoe says:

For the record, I’m very sympathetic to those 14, mainly due to a huge disproportionality of the punishment they have been receiving (even before the trial or judgement).

So I just made a gift to Nazaire: next time you, Jacques, can build your pleading on the fact that the owner of a blog critical to your (fake) client and your scumbag masters expressed sympathy to evil hackers.

mac insand (profile) says:

Nazaire needs to keep on filing

There are a couple of reasons that Nazaire needs to keep this up. One is that we get entertainment from seeing which variant of the Chewbacca defense he tries next. After the gay marriage and Paypal hacker defenses, what’s next? The other reason is that there might be a handful of attorneys that were drunk at the bar during his past filings, and additional meandering, reason-free, antilogical missives like this will eventually guarantee that there is no-one in the legal field unaware of his incompetence.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

One would hope that the court would look on this filing and issue the needed bench slap.

He is hoping to mislead the court in order to make them sympathetic to his plight, and ignore how he and his employers have been violating the law.

Oooh he got 1 email. Isn’t this the same fellow who about shit himself when his emails were submitted to the court? Did he get permission from the sender? Or are his rules different each time?

How many harassing letters has Pretenda et al send out?
How many harassing phone calls have they made?

You pound on your military record, you pound on but but but gays, you pound on but but but hackers… you should go pound sand you moron.

You either placed or answered an ad on Craigslist to get into this case to make money. This leads people to make judgements about your skills. Your filings confirm those judgements as maybe not being harsh enough.

You have no case and wasting the courts time should be punished.

And the person who emailed you is right, you aren’t very smart, are you. Had you actually been harassed (by the way Gibbs tried the whole they are picking on me trick as well and he had cancer on his side and failed with this gambit) you would file an actual complaint. An actual complaint would let you attempt to get the records to locate your single email sending harasser. Unless of course you already know who created and sent that email and have no need to investigate further. Your bosses forged documents and carried out fraud on the courts, to think for a second an unverified email that you refused to investigate counts as evidence assumes the Judges are as gullible as you. Bonus points for not posting the whole headers, it makes it much harder for anyone to take you seriously.

You really aren’t very smart are you.

abiyramanado says:

Lawyer

The Tax lawyer throughout India help in dealing with the particular specialists, as well as provide you with a preventing probability for a realistic solution. the abilities along with remaining operating can be a significant component of having a profitable legal career. Guides could perform a vital component in your skilled improvement. http://www.connecticut-lawyer-ct.com

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »