I think that keeping one doe on the case is genius on the judges behalf. This forces Ira to bring one of these sham cases to trial and expose all the bull shit evidence that these trolls have been hiding for so long. Of course that hinges on that one Doe fighting it and not settling.
Stupid hippies looking to make a stupid point and get their stupid behavior to go viral on the interwebs. They got what they were looking for, they should be happy.
Why should a person outside of the courts jurisdiction have to "Ask" to be removed from anything at all. They are outside the courts jurisdiction.
To an extent I can almost see the "subpoena the information as a group" argument , but once the information shows that the person is outside the courts jurisdiction that should be it.
As an aside, I would also be FAR more inclined to fight a case refiled close to my home vs hundreds of miles away. The cost over time of travel/lodging to DC to fight it Pro Se would alone probably not be worth it compared to 1-2 K to make it go away.
And lets not forget that the big "THEY ARE REFILING" stories ammount to a small handful of named defendants. Im betting that was purely a strategic move to keep on scaring people into settling. There sure hasnt been tens, let alone hundreds or thousands of named cases filed.
The ship is sinking and they want out before any blowback happens.
They are going to refile..which may be likely but I doubt that refiling them all in their thousands would be a good financial move. The cost in research and asset analysis to see which targets would be worth filing against would be high as would the cost to their business model if they start losing cases.
Could this also be associted with the suit filed against DG&W? Better to make it all look "above board" before answering charges of racketeering.
Odds are that there are PLENTY of homeowners who have their Internet access in their names while their teen age kid is downloading something. Odds could almost be 50/50 that the person on the bill is the person tapping the keys at any given time.
Come on. A Class Action is for when I screw a bunch of people over. They all get together as a class and sue me for damages. This is far from being "class actionable" theres no way to prove everybody is equally responsible or equally guilty to be lumped together as a class. This will never fly.
The MN is the only "surprise". All the rest (VA MD etc)are nothing big. From their office in Leesburg you can commute to those VA and MD jurisdictions in a matter of minutes.
If they were filing around the country I would say that they were not bluffing. This is just the best they can do from where they are plus one other office in MN somewhere that they added on.
So knowing that you are forcing some innocent people to "settle" is just the cost of doing business. "To make an omlette.." eh. And we wonder why people hate lawyers.
then make a case against an actual pirate. Sending out settlement requests knowing damn well that you are sweeping up the innocent because its cheaper to pay than to fight is plain wrong. Make a case with some due dilligance against a named defendant with more than just an IP address and a name and THEN make your offer.
If they want to build an actual case and take it to trial thats fine. However, anybody with half a brain can see what the money making scheme here is. These cases are simply tools to scare more people into settling regardless of their guilt or innocence.
I don't think the judges have ever properly addressed the joinder issue. They appear to be avoiding it at present. Eventually a real decision on the issue will have to be made.
Blah blah blah..still doesn't address the fact that the "game" here is to strong arm cash out of people based on an IP address alone. With no intent to actually sue anybody. What percentage of IP owners (people paying the ISP) are actually the people doing any ALLEGED downloading? These cases if the ever do go to trial are going to sink faster than the Titanic.
DGW gets a few firms in or near major metro centers to file these mass shakedowns in multiple courts to avoid the jurisdictional issue. This only serves to keep the "settlement mill" running. They still don't have the ability, the manpower or even the intention to take any signifigant number of people to trial. What needs to be done is to force a court to make a decision on misjoinder and make these shysters file individual suits.
While filing in the ISP's headquarters jurisdiction could at least be presented as a valid argument, I dont think thats what is being done here. I doubt that Washington DC is where ALL the ISP's that DGW are filing subpoenas for are headquartered. But it is "conveniently" where DGW is headquartered.
Because the standard of proof in a criminal case are to high of a hurdle for these shysters to jump. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" can't be met without a ton of work.
And of course the large risk with joining defendants in a suit where they will share the penalty is arguing that the teen who did in fact download and distribute the movie in question is as liable as the 40 yo housewife who's 12 yo downloaded it w/o her permission. Or the person who may have only downloaded a few kb of the file.
If we are honest though we all know that the real reason for joining all these defendants together is for the ease of "business operation" the law firms desire. The legal arguments justifying it are all after the fact.
I think that keeping one doe on the case is genius on the judges behalf. This forces Ira to bring one of these sham cases to trial and expose all the bull shit evidence that these trolls have been hiding for so long. Of course that hinges on that one Doe fighting it and not settling.
Stupid hippies looking to make a stupid point and get their stupid behavior to go viral on the interwebs. They got what they were looking for, they should be happy.
Why should a person outside of the courts jurisdiction have to "Ask" to be removed from anything at all. They are outside the courts jurisdiction.
To an extent I can almost see the "subpoena the information as a group" argument , but once the information shows that the person is outside the courts jurisdiction that should be it.
As an aside, I would also be FAR more inclined to fight a case refiled close to my home vs hundreds of miles away. The cost over time of travel/lodging to DC to fight it Pro Se would alone probably not be worth it compared to 1-2 K to make it go away.
And lets not forget that the big "THEY ARE REFILING" stories ammount to a small handful of named defendants. Im betting that was purely a strategic move to keep on scaring people into settling. There sure hasnt been tens, let alone hundreds or thousands of named cases filed.
This could mean a number of things.
The ship is sinking and they want out before any blowback happens.
They are going to refile..which may be likely but I doubt that refiling them all in their thousands would be a good financial move. The cost in research and asset analysis to see which targets would be worth filing against would be high as would the cost to their business model if they start losing cases.
Could this also be associted with the suit filed against DG&W? Better to make it all look "above board" before answering charges of racketeering.
Odds are that there are PLENTY of homeowners who have their Internet access in their names while their teen age kid is downloading something. Odds could almost be 50/50 that the person on the bill is the person tapping the keys at any given time.
Come on. A Class Action is for when I screw a bunch of people over. They all get together as a class and sue me for damages. This is far from being "class actionable" theres no way to prove everybody is equally responsible or equally guilty to be lumped together as a class. This will never fly.
The real test will be seeing how these cases fare.
The MN is the only "surprise". All the rest (VA MD etc)are nothing big. From their office in Leesburg you can commute to those VA and MD jurisdictions in a matter of minutes.
If they were filing around the country I would say that they were not bluffing. This is just the best they can do from where they are plus one other office in MN somewhere that they added on.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You figure out who you are going to sue and THEN you make them an offer. This "pay us or we MAY sue you" crap is just that...crap.
So knowing that you are forcing some innocent people to "settle" is just the cost of doing business. "To make an omlette.." eh. And we wonder why people hate lawyers.
Re: Re:
then make a case against an actual pirate. Sending out settlement requests knowing damn well that you are sweeping up the innocent because its cheaper to pay than to fight is plain wrong. Make a case with some due dilligance against a named defendant with more than just an IP address and a name and THEN make your offer.
If they want to build an actual case and take it to trial thats fine. However, anybody with half a brain can see what the money making scheme here is. These cases are simply tools to scare more people into settling regardless of their guilt or innocence.
I don't think the judges have ever properly addressed the joinder issue. They appear to be avoiding it at present. Eventually a real decision on the issue will have to be made.
Blah blah blah..still doesn't address the fact that the "game" here is to strong arm cash out of people based on an IP address alone. With no intent to actually sue anybody. What percentage of IP owners (people paying the ISP) are actually the people doing any ALLEGED downloading? These cases if the ever do go to trial are going to sink faster than the Titanic.
Way I see it.
DGW gets a few firms in or near major metro centers to file these mass shakedowns in multiple courts to avoid the jurisdictional issue. This only serves to keep the "settlement mill" running. They still don't have the ability, the manpower or even the intention to take any signifigant number of people to trial. What needs to be done is to force a court to make a decision on misjoinder and make these shysters file individual suits.
Re: Re:
While filing in the ISP's headquarters jurisdiction could at least be presented as a valid argument, I dont think thats what is being done here. I doubt that Washington DC is where ALL the ISP's that DGW are filing subpoenas for are headquartered. But it is "conveniently" where DGW is headquartered.
Re:
Because the standard of proof in a criminal case are to high of a hurdle for these shysters to jump. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" can't be met without a ton of work.
And of course the large risk with joining defendants in a suit where they will share the penalty is arguing that the teen who did in fact download and distribute the movie in question is as liable as the 40 yo housewife who's 12 yo downloaded it w/o her permission. Or the person who may have only downloaded a few kb of the file.
If we are honest though we all know that the real reason for joining all these defendants together is for the ease of "business operation" the law firms desire. The legal arguments justifying it are all after the fact.