New Prenda Law Shell Corp Threatening to Tell Your Neighbors You Pirated Porn

It appears that Prenda Law, freshly defeated, has formed a new shell company named the "Anti-Piracy Law Group," and has resumed sending threatening letters to supposed porn pirates. But this time, they've expanded their threats (from a letter (PDF) sent to Fight Copyright Trolls): "The list of possible suspects includes you, members of your household, your neighbors (if you maintain an open wi-fi connection) and anyone who might have visited your house. In the coming days we will contact these individuals to investigate whether they have any knowledge of the acts described in my client’s prior letter" Naturally, the letter also notes that the recipient can avoid having the list of videos they supposedly copied sent to their neighbors and family if they settle for a few thousand bucks...

Comments

Haha, let them.

[Anonymous Coward]

1. I am not ashamed to admit I watch porn.

2. Watching porn is something I do with the windows open so my asshole shithead neighbor across the street's wife can watch.

3. Yeah you asshole. Your wife likes to watch me stroke.

4. I am not ashamed to admit I watch porn.

-- Posted anonymously for obvious reasons.

Re:Haha, let them.

[MiKM]

Posted anonymously for obvious reasons.

I thought you said you weren't ashamed to admit that you watched porn.

Re:Haha, let them.

[realityimpaired]

I'm not ashamed of my sexuality. I don't pirate porn, largely because the majority of it is fake and really poor quality (I'm not in the target audience), but let them tell my neighbours. They'll get hit with a defamation lawsuit pretty quickly.

And my neighbours have been able to wrap their heads around the fact that I'm a tree-hugging dirt-worshipping lesbian hippie who goes to festivals where witchcraft is practiced from time to time, I think they won't have any problem understanding that I may look at porn occasionally too.

Re:Haha, let them.

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

I think he meant that in a tongue in cheek fashion, though what that tongue is doing, we can only guess...

Re:Haha, let them.

[Anonymous Coward]

* Yesterday I saw Star Trek, one part of which I'd say was soft porn.

Ooooh, is that the one where Kirk and Spock finally kiss? That one is awesome. ;-)

Re: Haha, let them.

[garcia]

Woooooosh

Re:Haha, let them.

[cdrudge]

majority of it is fake

Wait, what!?!? It's fake? Crap. I guess I probably should go back to pirating movies and TV shows since those are real then.

Re:Haha, let them.

[ILongForDarkness]

Yeah I usually don't share my fetish for tranny midget shieser porn until the second date.

Re:Haha, let them.

[Anonymous Coward]

I dont pirate porn because watching it more than once feels too much like a relationship.

Re:Haha, let them.

[argStyopa]

"....lesbian...."

"...not ashamed to rub one out to porn with the shades up..."

Where do you live, again?

We may have solved some of the porn-piracy problem right there.

Re:Haha, let them.

[serviscope_minor]

I don't pirate porn, largely because the majority of it is fake

You mean he wasn't a real plumber?

Though that explains why he did such a poor job fixing things I suppose.

Re: Haha, let them.

[DickBreath]

Watching the Prenda pr0n means you downloaded it and thus committed copyright infringement. The only way to obtain Prenda gay pr0n is to download it, as Prenda's clients do not offer their gay pr0n for sail. The fact that Prenda sends you a settlement letter doesn't mean you are guilty, it is merely an accusation based on a slipshod "investigation". Of course, if you don't pay, all your family and neighbors will be contacted for further "investigation" to ask them if they know anything about you downloading the gay pr0n of Prenda Law's clients.

The six figures he's talking about comes from the statutory damages for copyright infringement. (Not that you're guilty, but just merely accused. But hey, isn't it just cheaper to settle for a few thousand bucks rather than spend much more fighting it in court, and potentially losing, meaning a judgement against you for six figures?) Plus you don't want your family and neighbors finding out you may watch gay pr0n and thus they stone you to death.

Re:Haha, let them.

[Anonymous Coward]

So porn is fake, but you practice witchcraft. Okay.

Re:Haha, let them.

[davester666]

How exactly do you hide that from the tranny midgets you date, when you only take them to TacoBell?

As long as they're honest about what kind.

[pecosdave]

They can know I watch it, just as long as they aren't telling everyone I watch the wrong type.

Re:As long as they're honest about what kind.

[Chrisq]

They can know I watch it, just as long as they aren't telling everyone I watch the wrong type.

another brony?

Black mail

[Anonymous Coward]

This is black mail, and illegal.

=]

Re:Black mail

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

It really is blackmail. This is a threat with menances in order to get someone to comply with the sender, and it is not a reasonable way of enforcing the request. If they simply send out the letters, while questionable in other ways it is not blackmail. These threats however are genuine straight up blackmail. I'm not sure whether this is criminal or civil offence in the US, but in the UK you'd be in a lot of trouble for this.

Re:Black mail

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but your porn is black male.

Re:Black mail

[dkleinsc]

It is in fact illegal in the US as well.

Although "blackmail" is such an ugly word. I prefer "extortion" - the X makes it sound cool.

Re:Black mail

[Creepy]

Blackmail is criminal in the US, as is slander and defamation of character (and heck, I'm probably missing 100 similar charges for the country where using the internet is a felony by some interpretations of law). Even in the best case, this will scare people that don't know better than to pirate by proxy (anonymous proxies, coffee shops, etc), and even then, being nearly impossible to prove (without a search warrant and raid) will result in every single person involved suing them. This is going to backfire on them like a backward facing shotgun.

Re:Black mail

[mabhatter654]

I suppose they are counting on the recipient not going to the police over these letters. Part of Blackmail is that if youvwent to the police to defend yourself, you might get in trouble you don't want. As police don't enforce copyright law (like they don't enforce cheating on your wife) I don't think they would actually have to INVESTIGATE that you committed or didn't commit the act to enforce the attempt to extort money.

As these were certainly sent through the USPS it becomes a POSTAL crime as well. I guess the rest of the Prenda's team wanted to visit jail too. The problem with Blackmail is that you eventually send one of these to another, richer person in the middle of a messy divorce having a worse day than you... And they hire somebody to "deliver your payment". In a non-refundable manner. Makes a good episode of Castle.

Re:Black mail

[budgenator]

It's not blackmail because they are basicaly saying ,"Your neghbor's IP address was illiegally filesharing the following copyrighted porn titles, were you doing it through his unsecured WiFi router?" and therfore conducting an investigation. If the resident Adult male excepts their terms then there is no reason to conduct the above investigation. I'm not defending, just explaining.

I hope these dirtbags are smart enough to only target people from out of town and use a Post Office box for the checks because sooner or later they're going to hit a real whacko who'll figure it's easier to just kill them than to pay the tribute.

Re:Black mail

[squiggleslash]

Wonder if the right response is "Dear Sir, I can confirm it was nobody in my household who downloaded the content in question. Feel free to investigate my neighbors. Be careful how you word your accusations when making your investigation as we will sue for libel if, as a result of your investigation, any of our neighbors are under the impression we were responsible for the download."

Re:Black mail

[Laxori666]

If a backward facing shotgun backfires, wouldn't you hit your target?

Re:Black mail

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps XXXtortion?

Re:Black mail

[stanlyb]

I have to correct you: NEVER ever make written statements like this, confessing your guilt or innocence. It may sound strange, but after this letter you could go in jail for false claims (and no, there is no need to prove that you actually pirated the "movie").
In other words, i would rewrite the letter to something like this:
"Dear Sir, Feel free to investigate my neighbors. Be careful how you word your accusations when making your investigation as we will sue for libel if, as a result of your investigation, any of our neighbors are under the impression we were responsible for the download."

Re:Black mail

[rijrunner]

The real kicker is that this was sent *after* Duffy was referred to the US Attorney's Office on possible RICO violations.

    Blackmail is often the tactic used in racketeering operations to acquire money. I really don't like these guys and they have made zero effort to establish the identity of the downloader.. which is the issue here..

    The real question here is whether this falls into line of reasonable conduct and due diligence. I can see Duffy's defense to blackmail claims. If the IP address is not enough to establish the identity of the person who did the download, then yes.. the interviews with neighbors is, in fact, an appropriate action to take prior to filing a lawsuit.

    There have been a lot of legal responses in their previous lawsuits saying that they lacked sufficient evidence of the specific person who did the downloads. Exactly what steps would people think are reasonable to establish the identity of the downloader? I suspect that they do overlap with the steps outlined in that letter.
   

Good luck with that

[Fear the Clam]

Because when these guys fail to prove that the defendant's computer is the one they claim, any lawyer worth his or her degree will slap them with a defamation lawsuit.

Re:Good luck with that

[wvmarle]

Just read the letter in the linked article. Reeks of troll. Typical Nigerian-type content: they refer to material stolen from their client, without naming either. Not who that client (presumably copyright holder) might be; nor what content was allegedly stolen. I'm seeing similar vaguely worded e-mails time and again - and most of them are Nigerian scams. They are also intentionally vague, trying to have the reader fill in the gaps (which people automatically do), and make the reader feel as if it's targeting them while it's really a standard letter sent to hundreds if not thousands of people.

If I'd receive such a letter, I'd probably just toss it in the trash, like I do with similar e-mails. They'd at least have to identify the alleged stolen content, and with that, who their client would be.

Or would it be possible to file a complaint with police, and have them initiate a criminal investigation? May be hard in practice for a single letter but if more people are targeted they may act on it.

Re:Good luck with that

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Because when these guys fail to prove that the defendant's computer is the one they claim, any lawyer worth his or her degree will slap them with a defamation lawsuit.

I think that this is their 'clever' twist on exactly that problem. In their prior iteration, one of the things that they were slapped down for was their utterly crap 'computer forensics' procedure, which wasn't even close to adequate for identifying the actual party behind the alleged piracy.

So, making a virtue of that incompetence, their letter now says that, just to be extra sure and stuff, they'll be doing a more thorough investigation that just so happens to involve asking everyone you know "We think that person X downloaded 'Deviant Donkey Dicks V. 2'; but it might have been you. Do you think it was him?"

I can't believe that this wouldn't fall under the realm of 'trivially extortion'; but it's a cute little twist.

They've shot themselves in the foot legally

[Chrisq]

"The list of possible suspects includes you, members of your household, your neighbors (if you maintain an open wi-fi connection) and anyone who might have visited your house

So you just say it must have been a neighbour or visitor, ask them to add all the visitors to neighbours' houses, the post man, delivery men, etc. and let them get on with it. If they go to court quote their own words - it could have been any of these!

Re:They've shot themselves in the foot legally

[AmiMoJo]

You have to look at it from Prenda's perspective. They think you are guilty and just holding out on them, so this threat is a cheap way to make you pay up and avoid going to court. They have had some bad experiences in court before so generally want to avoid going back there.

Re:They've shot themselves in the foot legally

[ShieldW0lf]

We should just do away with copyright already. From now on, the only way to get paid for porno is by the cameraman who offers you 500 euro while he's giving you a ride to your friend's house. He'll have no way to recoup, other than taking money from investors who convinced him to release the footage on Bittorrent.

Hot Legal Teens Fucking on a BMW. Brought to you by BMW.
 
Product placement would be an easy way to fund free porn. And really, how much more Pavlovian can you get than to have someone masturbate while looking at your product?

Wow ...

[gstoddart]

These guys might find themselves getting some pretty major smackdown from a court beyond what has already happened.

This is straight up extortion, and at this rate, I wouldn't be surprised to see someone slap them with RICO charges or something.

They don't have any evidence which can stand up in court, so they're resorting to smearing you in front of your family on the assertion that you must have violated a copyright they don't own.

If ever lawyers needed some sanctions from the court, it's these guys. Epic douchebags.

Re:Wow ...

[emho24]

Only way to stop them is to lock them up or disbar them.

Why "or"?

Re:Wow ...

[gstoddart]

They didn't say they were going to give your name out.

They certainly implied it since they're saying they will contact your friends and family and neighbors to see if they have any knowledge of this "alleged activity" (which they don't actually state anything about what is alleged).

So the threat certainly reads to me like they're suggesting they might be naming you in the process of saying "hey, do you know anything about this porn this guy is alleged to have downloaded".

From what I can see of that letter, it's thinly veiled threats, an extortion attempt, and no details at all on what is alleged to have been downloaded. I don't see how this is anything other than the same old illegal tactics which got them into so much trouble in the first place.

Re:Wow ...

[Yebyen]

Yes. I could see how you'd read it that way. I think that is the part that makes it the difference between extortion and blackmail or simply fishing.

You would likely have to find yourself in the courtroom first before arguing that they threatened you or defamed your character to others by name, and that would only work if they actually named you personally, which is totally moot since they will obviously avoid going to court at all costs just like the last Prenda Law. They would most likely argue in that court: they were going to send the same confidential fishing letter to everyone who might be involved until they were satisfied that they had found the right target (evident that they have found him now since they have brought that person to court... ha)

And when they did exactly that, nobody's letter would name anybody else, that everyone's letter would look exactly the same, sparse on details, veiled accusations with no substance (since everyone is someone else's neighbor, right?) and anyone claiming they threatened to defame them was guilty of some other criminal act we haven't even yet considered.

They Learned From SCO

[some old guy]

I'm sure they are perfectly aware that their claims are groundless and probably illegal. They're also aware that their lifespan is shrinking rapidly.

I think what they're doing is seeing how many poor schmucks they can scare into settling for a few quick bucks before the whole scheme implodes.

Clearly, SCO's "Linux Licensing" was a model modus operandi for trolls everywhere.

Re:They Learned From SCO

[schlachter]

They're going to do this to the wrong guy and end up with a hit squad coming after them. At least I hope so.

Re:Wow

[Mister Transistor]

This may very likely get them shot. Someone who's life they've ruined may very well become completely unbalanced and do what we all would secretly love to see happen...

Re:well

[Chrisq]

Who cares unless you live in Utah or in a monastery?

However the Utah thing is relevant as they watch more porn per capita than anywhere else in the U.S....

I thought you were kidding, but it's true.

Isn't this pretty much...

[Dachannien]

...the definition of extortion? For example:

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-59

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2905.11

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=518-527

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/875

Re:Isn't this pretty much...

[femtobyte]

However, remember that defamation must be false.

No, it doesn't, to be extortion (note the absence of any such qualification in the law you've quoted). Truth is a defense for slander/libel: if I want to publish in the newspaper that my neighbor watches goat porn, then I can avoid libel charges by proving it true. But if I ask my neighbor for money first to not publish their porn habits, then I'm extorting them --- independent of whether publishing would be slander/libel.

Next on... BLACKMAIL

[EvilXenu]

Monty Python beat these guys by several decades: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrRZVCg31fE

Defamation of character, anyone?

[fudgefactor7]

How can this tactic not qualify as defamation? With the huge number of screwed up lawsuits over bittorrent piracy going on, it would only be a short while before they "outed" the wrong person...and then they would be liable. What then? They apologize and hope that they don't get sued? Screw that. They start this mess, they mess with the wrong person, the first thing would be "lawyer up!" and counter file against them--and make them eat their words.

Re:Defamation of character, anyone?

[zyzko]

Unfortunately these people are experts in hiding their tracks - more skilled than the ones they are suing.

Sure - eventually they will be barred but until that they can just make up new shell companies and name a hobo as a CEO for the price of a wine bottle - or better yet, just use someones name without their knowledge instead. One the judges get pissed, deny everything and refuse to testify, repeat and get a fee hundred thousand each round - keeps a few people employed.

I would not be surprised at all even if the producers they claim to represent are not aware of what is done using their products - I would guess that in the industry today you have to be nice to the customer and offer options, and that is what most are doing, not name and shame (because the competition is fierce, and there are free legal alternatives).

Stick to accurate accusations

[slim]

From TFA:

infamous scumbag Steve “Lightspeed” Jones, a pornographer who specializes in “barely legal” genre (i.e. he recruits and films very young girls)

(emphasis theirs)

Now, by all means call him a scumbag on the basis of his extortion and blackmail. By all means find actual ways in which the way he produces porn is scummy.

But the "barely" in "barely legal" means they're above the age of consent, and hence not "very young". Indeed, since he's in the US, and they're (barely) legal, they must be 18 (2 years older than the age of consent in many countries), and capable of making their own decisions.

They need the cash

[goodmanj]

Hey, cut the Prenda guys some slack. They really need to earn some spending money, what with their upcoming dismissal from the bar and possible RICO prosecution...

RICO

[Jaysyn]

Straight from copyright troll to racketeering? Impressive!

Re:Skyclad?

[allaunjsilverfox2]

I watch porn. I enjoy adults performing a natural function. And I have no reason to pirate porn. LITERALLY a search engine away and you have streaming porn. I mean, You have to really enjoy a certain actor to go as far as pirating a video. And then, why not show that you enjoy their work by paying for it? And to those that don't think performing on screen while performing sex acts is work, I would disagree. While I personally have never done so, I can imagine it is quite uncomfortable at times. "Hey earl, Stop, stop, stop! You are doing it wrong, You see her face? She should be begging and you aren't performing like you should. Get out of the way, john, take earls place, he is terrible today." I know that would hurt on a professional and emotional level. >.>

I refer you to the reply in Arkell vs. Pressdram

[catman]

Also, see figure 1.

Re:Skyclad?

[asylumx]

No kidding! Why pirate what you can already get for free?

It's not defamation if it's in a lawsuit

[DeathGrippe]

IANAL, but in a legal action I took a few years ago, in which the defendant accused me of heinous acts, I learned that statements contained within a lawsuit which would be considered defamation if published elsewhere, are not considered defamatory.

Note, however, that if those statements are proven false they will have legal consequences within that context.

Re:It's not defamation if it's in a lawsuit

[realityimpaired]

Yes... but TFA (and TFS) says that they're threatening to tell the neighbours. Marquess of Queensberry rules. Literally.... (look up Oscar Wilde, if you don't get the reference)

Re:It's not defamation if it's in a lawsuit

[Immerman]

But that would require that they actually file a lawsuit - an act for which they've already been repeatedly hammered for. Continuing to bring baseless claims would risk sanctions being brought against the lawyers participating.

Re:Wow

[X0563511]

Secretly?

Re:When is the scum going in the slammer?

[dgatwood]

Right about now, I'm thinking. Up until now, everything they did was at least ostensibly legal, albeit unethical. This, however, is pretty much open and shut blackmail and extortion, both of which are federal crimes in the United States and nearly every other country in the world. In the U.S., a single letter like this is enough to qualify the sender for two separate federal charges with a maximum combined sentence of three years in federal prison, on top of various state and local charges that may also apply.

Re:Skyclad?

[GoogleShill]

I know that would hurt on a professional and emotional level.

I'm pretty sure the bowling pin up that girl's ass hurts on more of a physical level :)

Re:Wow

[Schmorgluck]

Secretly?

I mean, I'm fundamentally against death penalty and I have a wide range of arguments for that, but if someone ended up shooting the Prenda guys my reaction would be somewhat similar to how I felt about Osama Bin Laden being shot down by CIA operatives: I wouldn't think "Justice Has Been Done" by any stretch, but I wouldn't shed a tear either.