Slashdot Mirror
EFF Jumps In To Defend Bloggers Being Sued By Prenda
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The Electronic Frontier Foundation has entered the fray to defend the bloggers sued by Prenda Law Firm. Prenda, oblivious to such well known legal niceties as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the affirmative defense of truth, the difference between a defamatory statement of fact and the expression of a negative opinion, and the First Amendment, has immediately — and illegally — sought to subpoena information leading to the identities of the bloggers. I would not be surprised to see these "lawyers" get into even more hot water than they're already in. And I take my hat off to the EFF for stepping in here."
I'm not a coward, I just haven't registered yet. :p
Deliberate negligence, All costs x 3. When will they actually start enforcing the false claim rules in DMCA. The fines can be Very high.
The hearing scheduled for today to decide the fate of Copyright Troll Brett Gibbs has concluded, and it was apparently very bad for Prenda et al.
Adam Steinbaugh was in attendance and has a quick run through on his twitter account. Wen White was also there and is currently writing a detailed recap to be posted on popehat.com later tonight.
While I am amazed and pleased at the attention this saga has been getting, I think it's important to remember that while the wide audience is merely entertained or amused by these proceedings, for the innocents like me who have had their lives turned upside down by Prenda this is more than simple entertainment-- it's justice.
Prenda have much bigger things to worry about than the EFF. They have really annoyed a federal judge, and may be guilty of perjury, contempt of court, fraud on the court and identity theft. Probably a couple of other offences as well.
Prenda isn't finished yet, but given the recent hearing they probably won't be around much longer
They're having a bad day in court while the judge questions them as to why a witness they offered to testify about the company apparently knows absolutely nothing about who owns it or calls the shots. When two people have accused the firm of identity theft (both of whom actually managed to show up in the courtroom, unlike the Prenda folks, who complained it was too hard), things are NOT looking good for them.
Also they may have failed to notify someone of a stay in discovery. At this point, I can only hope that the judge elects to use some Federal Marshals to put a stop to their shenanigans. Right now, my First-Amendment-protected opinion is that they resemble Orly Taitz in all the wrong ways. But they're free to sue me for saying that if they want to provide me with a free front row seat to their Waterloo.
EFF has limited resources, money, man power.
As much as they may want to, they simply cannot take on every case that crops up. They have to go for higher profile ones, at least in part because it helps get them donations that they obviously use to take on other cases; plus they no doubt vet a case before agreeing to take it on, just because someone is decrying the end of free speech does not mean that there are not other facts in play that they simply aren't telling people in the news articles.
Ken from Popehat is awesome, but he does not personally provide representation to all the defendants he covers in his blog; nor does his law firm. (He has represented defendants in important first-amendment cases, but he writes about far more cases on his blog than he personally handles.)
What Ken does is send out the "Popehat Signal" -- basically, writing up the cases on his blog and asking for help -- in hopes of finding local lawyers who are willing to represent those defendants pro bono.
While this is certainly good, it is different from what the EFF does, which is actually provide counsel at their own expense. Ken doesn't have to pay a penny (well, hosting charges...) to send out the Popehat Signal. You shouldn't judge the two activities by the same standards.
Further, the EFF has newsletters, a website, and so on, in which they also engage in similar publicity activities to Ken.
It appears that you can make this shit up, because I can find no evidence to suggest that Prenda Law has any connection whatsoever with Orly Taitz.
"So what your saying is they only support freedom when it is profitable and convenient for them to do so?"
No, dipshit. The EFF is a non-profit, they do not sue when it is "profitable."
They have limited resources. Ever hear the phrase "pick your battles?"
If they try to fight every case, they go under within months and NOBODY wins, and no legal precedents are set.
Jesus fuck, are there really people this fucking clueless?
This space available.
IAALSAAAC (I am a law student and an anonymous coward) and civil case law sets precedents just as criminal case law does. As you might imagine, civil case law precedent generally only effects civil cases, though that is not necessarily the case and depends on the nature of the precedent set.