Slashdot Mirror
Appeals Court Upholds Sanction Against BitTorrent Download Attorney
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has upheld sanctions awarded by a District Court against one of the lawyers bringing copyright infringement cases against individuals for BitTorrent movie downloads, in Mick Haig Productions v. Does 1-670. The Court's opinion (PDF) described the lawyer's 'strategy' as 'suing anonymous internet users for allegedly downloading pornography illegally using the powers of the court to find their identity, then shaming or intimidating them into settling for thousands of dollars — a tactic that he has employed all across the state and that has been replicated by others across the country.'"
He numbered his Does 1-670 instead for 0-669. For shame.
It's Simple.
Don't be intimidated.
You can actually win by simple statement in front of the judge.
"How did you come about this libelous material?"
Because it directly violates civil liberties, I personally am not to worried about crusader lawyers. Because they are easily ignored by "COUNTER Suit threat."
Evan Stone got ripped a new one. Nice to see...
But if capitalizing on the accused's inability to weather the risks and costs of trial are an unacceptable tactic, doesn't that mean plea deals by prosecutors are also unacceptable?
"Back to the drawing board."
Pure bullshit
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
So the Appellate Court is upholding the rights of the lower court.
Don't expect the courts to start ruling against media companies that follow the laws that they paid the legislatures to write. Don't even expect significant sanctions when they break the law, as long as they stop when they're told. It looks kind of like this is a media ruling, but its more a "respect the judges" ruling.
The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm
http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5
Should have got a patent on the process!
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
I don't think we do that any more.
"For the term of his natural life"?
I'm betting not.
Some time in prison?
After all, as an officer of the court, he's undermined the institution. Surely this should be treated seriously?
A large fine?
???
I really don't know, but I'm guessing none of the above.
So, what are the consequences of his actions?
Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
The District Court is unhappy, because the lawyer issued the subpoenas without the permission of the District Court. In fact, it was after the District Court told the lawyer to stop doing that. The Appellate Court agreed.
So the Appellate Court is upholding the rights of the lower court.
Don't expect the courts to start ruling against media companies that follow the laws that they paid the legislatures to write. Don't even expect significant sanctions when they break the law, as long as they stop when they're told. It looks kind of like this is a media ruling, but its more a "respect the judges" ruling.
Exactly right. This is a "wtf were you doing sending subpoenas to the ISPs, and then wtf were you doing not responding to the show cause order?!" At most, it's dicta indicating that the judges (properly) aren't going to accept these "sue 50 Does, get discovery, demand settlements, and then drop the case if anyone argues" suits. This will have no effect on the more legally legitimate, if morally questionable, RIAA/MPAA suits, which do proceed.
That is the specific grounds for the sanctions, but if you read the actual court order they make it pretty clear they despise his tactics overall, which is a good sign (not sure if it sets any kind of precedent, but it might). The judge seemed pretty pissed over the idea of what he was doing, not just the fact that he was breaking the rules. I may be reading slightly too much into it, but I don't think so.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
Heh. I went to law school with him.
so... just like all your posts then you karmawhore ?
The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm
http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5
I had just recently read this. Interesting.
Actually, the appellate court didn't agree--they just said that the attorney suing the does had waived his right to make the arguments he made on appeal, because he hadn't made them below and on-time.
In other words, he lost the appeal on a technicality. He might well have lost it on the merits as well, but it never got that far.
The only especially notable thing about this is a circuit court on record talking about the pattern of abusive litigation in mass-porn lawsuits.
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
It's "Admiral Ackbar", but nice try.
Porn is the reason, not legal procedure. The same tactics are excused when its the RIAA/MPAA as mistakes or bad-apple attorneys or 'aggressive' enforcement of IP rights.
Correct me if I'm wrong: In order for the attorney to acuse people of downloading child pornography, wouldn't he first have to download the torrent to ensure it actually contained that type of material? If this step wasn't performed, his cases would have no merrit. So, doesn't that also make him or his firm just as guilty as the people he is accusing? Somebody should shake him down for 1000s.
Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
What you've described, where the public prosecutor is charged with determining the facts in the case, is essentially how most of the world other than England and former colonies and territories does it. The Napoleonic code is often mistakenly described as guilty til proven innocent, but that's actually not true.
Ever hear of a lawyer taking a suit against another lawyer?
All the time. Defendants and plaintiffs are both allowed lawyers, after all, and somebody defendants/plaintiff's *are* lawyers
lawyers stick together
So do geeks.
How many people defended Hans Reiser as a near-saint purely on the basis of his geek-credentials?
How often do we see convoluted-to-the-point-of-insanity arguments for geeks (or again "the man") in tech/geek related articles?
However, it seems to me that a judge is more likely to defend the institution than an individual. Higher up the political ladder this changes a bit, but overall the courts are fairly forgiving of behaviour that - while legal - would disgust most people. There are plenty of hard situations in court that still swing either way.
We have cases where judges have thrown away odd solid but improperly-obtained evidence against a rapist or killer. Locally I read about a case where a father had molested his daughter, but as they were ESL and the cops took too long to get a proper translator etc, the case ended up being drop due to a violation of due process. Would you be able to let somebody walk after stabbing a grandma or molesting a child because of a police screw-up or court delays?
In situations like that, I'd imagine that many end up clinging to "the system" like a log on the ocean after a shipwreck. Obviously there's other stuff that happens as well (corruption, bribery, scandal, etc), so the system is far from perfect, in fact in many ways it is IMHO pretty screwed up (see patents).
Painting all judges or lawyers as buddies in a grand conspiracy is a bit disingenious. Many are players in a broken system that's jumped the rails and lost control. I won't paint them all as innocent, but painting them all as crooked isn't right either.