Rightscorp Claims Its Harassing Phone Calls Safeguarded By Multiple Constitutional Amendments

from the putting-the-'rights'-back-in-'rightscorp' dept

Third-party copyright troll Rightscorp is fighting a couple of lawsuits related to its alleged telephonic harassment of alleged infringers. One wonders what the ROI is on funding robocalling in pursuit of $10-20 “settlements” from suspected infringers. Whatever it is, the ROI is definitely edging further into the red, what with the company now paying lawyers to safeguard its “right” to harass and threaten people who won’t pay up (or haven’t even performed any infringing activity).

I don’t make this assertion lightly. Multiple complaints made to the FCC back up the assertions being made in two class-action lawsuits. Rightscorp has responded to the allegations made in the lawsuit filed earlier this year, claiming the company willfully violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) in its “collection” efforts. (Note that most collection efforts revolve around unpaid bills — something consumers previously agreed to pay in one form or another. Rightscorp’s “collections” involve no agreement from consumers — only accusations based on little more than snippets of torrent activity and an IP address. And yet, the company treats accused infringers as though this is unpaid debt, rather than the speculative wallet-rummaging it actually is.)

Rightscorp’s response is hilarious — although certainly not intentionally. First off, it denies pretty much every allegation except for the issuing of subpoenas and emails — things nearly impossible to deny thanks to the paper trail they create.

Once it gets past that point, it starts issuing its affirmative defenses. According to Rightscorp, several Constitutional amendments enshrine its right to harass alleged infringers over the phone.

While the majority of its eleven defenses are questionable enough, the defenses 3-6 attack the law itself, claiming that TCPA is unconstitutional, namely it violates the First, Fifth, Fourteenth, and Eighth Amendments. Why is it so, Rightscorp doesn’t say.

From the filing:

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“the TCPA”), codified at 47 U.S.C. § 227, upon which Plaintiffs’ claims rely, violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.


The TCPA violates the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.


The TCPA violates the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

It appears Rightscorp would rather have the court examine a law twice held to be constitutional than look into its “collection” activities.

The First Amendment argument isn’t exactly novel. Rightscorp and Warner Bros. have previously argued that copyright trolling is free speech. But, in that case, at least it actually made an argument. The affirmative defense offered here is nothing more than literally “the law violates the First Amendment,” something no court has held to this point.

Beyond that, the other affirmative Constitutional defenses offered by Rightscorp are probably going to be viewed as “novel” by the court — something that’s rarely a compliment when it’s written in a judicial opinion. As of right now, they’re not even arguments. They’re just assertions. The real fun will begin when Rightscorp starts explaining how violating a consumer protection law is not just protected speech, but is safeguarded by the application of Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Filed Under: , , , , ,
Companies: rightscorp

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 “Rightscorp Claims Its Harassing Phone Calls Safeguarded By Multiple Constitutional Amendments”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Jane Doe (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Nor is stealing you idiot. Do you really think you get to infringe content you don’t own and there are no repercussions and that rights holders have no recourse. We might as well call the police “trolls” for simply trying to enforce the law. I love websites like this that allow laypeople to say whatever they want, with no basis in law or fact.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Your first premise is incorrect, not everyone receiving said calls have stolen anything. In fact, some of them do not even own a computer. So, I suggest you place that presumptuous attitude where the sun don’t shine.

Your weak attempt at analogy is bad and you should feel bad.

“I love websites like this that allow laypeople to say whatever they want, with no basis in law or fact.”

… and your alternative is? I’d guess you approve of censorship when it is not your rights.

DannyB (profile) says:

This is why Copyright should go away

Let’s be fair. The infringing activities of a few people can get an entire site, or worse, an entire domain name affecting many innocent sites to disappear.

It only seems fair that the abuse of copyright by a few bad actors should similarly be able to get Copyright to completely disappear in a flaming puff of greasy black smoke. (a truncated devilish scream is briefly heard as the flames vanish.)

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Only if you believe there is some vague, unproven, remote possibility that they might have infringed your copyright because they share the same global internet that you use.

Your right to call Rightscorp at all hours of the night must end when either (1) they pay you, or (2) you decide to take them to court in a lawsuit and are prepared to prove your case. As long as you are not prepared to prove anything, and they don’t pay, then you can keep calling.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Remember that one of the talking heads from Rightscorp said they don’t agree with the law so they will keep doing what they want until SCOTUS rules in their favor. (I paraphrase).

So we don’t have to follow the law because we think the law is stupid, because it denies us our cash by harassing people into paying us for allegations we can’t prove and most likely would fold under scrutiny.

I look forward to their next venture into this area, peddling their patent snakeoil a 3rd (4th) time to an industry who insists that they are sick, but ignoring that they might stop being sick if they stopped hitting their head against the wall while demanding it move out of their way.

Stoatwblr (profile) says:

Re: Re:

“Remember that one of the talking heads from Rightscorp said they don’t agree with the law so they will keep doing what they want until SCOTUS rules in their favor.”

It’s more likely the SCOTUS would issue a permanent restraining order preventing Rightscorp, its sucessors or agents continuing the behaviour or inciting others to do so.

One can hope anyway.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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 »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...