Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Copyright Troll's Property Seized To Pay Bankruptcy Debts (ktetch.co.uk)

Posted by timothy on from the nelson-laughs-and-so-do-we dept.

ktetch-pirate writes: Copyright troll firm Prenda may be gone, but one of its principals — Paul Hansmeier — is starting to feel Karma's burn. In a bankruptcy hearing on the 3rd, Judge Sanberg ordered it converted to Chapter 7, requiring assets be seized and liquidated to pay the 2.5M+ in debts including judgments from courts around the country, as well as proceeds from the sale of Hansmeier's 1.2M condo in Minnesota. She justified it by saying he had a practice of deceiving the courts with his extortionate schemes.

42 of 69 comments (clear)

  1. HA by ldobehardcore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Serves that pile of human garbage right. Take them for every dime. Leave them out on the streets.

    --
    Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
    1. Re:HA by KGIII · · Score: 2

      This is even better than prison. At least i think so. In prison, they can hide their shame from the world at large. Now, half the man (or less) and subjected to publicity they walk among the people they once abused. What better way for the fickle hands of fate to deal the next hand?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    2. Re:HA by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I like to think of it as Stage 2 in the Scandal-Ruin-Prison trifecta.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    3. Re:HA by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Maybe they'll string up before they go to prison? I'd not, of course, suggest they do so but I'm thinking it might work out best for them in the long run. I don't see where they'll *likely* end up in prison, however. It could happen but it's unlikely.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    4. Re:HA by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      I think a sleazy guy like that has smuggled out enough cash to the Cayman Islands to keep him happy.

      Oh, and he'll be back. We'll be discussing his new criminal "business" here on Slashdot in a couple of years. Folks like that never learn, have no moral ethics, and have no respect for the law. And never will.

      Short of killing him, there is no way to prevent him from pursuing other dubious activities.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re:HA by KGIII · · Score: 1

      It's the holiday season. Lemme pretend that this will be a lesson to him and others who would do the same things. 'Tis but a small gift. I'm going to imagine this is the end of it, for them, and others will see this case and not be copyright trolls. I still think all the work should have gone into the public domain as chances are this will just end up being bought by more copyright trolls but I am going to remain deluded. Hrumpf!

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    6. Re: HA by ememisya · · Score: 1

      I think JudgeÂHarry Pregerson already did the killing.

    7. Re: HA by ememisya · · Score: 1

      I think converting the bankruptcy to a Chapter 7 was the legal punch in the face these guys deserved. You can get away with extortion? Guess what we can get away with? Pay up buddy. I'd force them to send apology letters as well.

    8. Re:HA by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is even better than prison. At least i think so. In prison, they can hide their shame from the world at large. Now, half the man (or less) and subjected to publicity they walk among the people they once abused. What better way for the fickle hands of fate to deal the next hand?

      I've known people like the subject of the article. You're not thinking like they and their peers think. They do not feel shame for their actions nor do they feel shame for being subjected to punishment for them. They feel their actions are legitimate and they feel anger directed toward those that have thwarted them, and actions like the court has taken only stiffen their resolve.

      People like this need to be put into jail if they're to actually learn. People like this that continue to have their freedom are still free to pursue more of these kinds of schemes because they've seen how little the consequences, really, are for them. Left like this, with some means, they're going to simply repeat the pattern that we've already seen.

      Embarrassment on the streets? Walking among those they abused? Do you feel like everyone is watching you on the streets? Do you feel like the entire community knows who you are or even cares? Hell, criminals that have inflicted violence on others and been convicted semi-anonymously walk the streets and no one really knows what they've done or how that could mean that they are riskier than others; copyright trolls are less of a danger and far less directly impacting on the local community and will easily avoid any sort of public shame during the course of their days.

      This is a victory, but it's hollow one and only one more battle, not the end of the war.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    9. Re: HA by spartacus_prime · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but conversion effectively shutters the business, so the Prenda name will cease to exist.

      --
      If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.
    10. Re:HA by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I've known some pretty crappy people but nobody who didn't have shame, or at least a good game face, afterwards. I've known a few that mostly regretted getting caught.

      You're probably right. Damn it. *sighs* I doubt they broke any criminal statutes that will land them in jail. Maybe a good contempt of court sentence will be an eventual finding but I'm not entirely sure if it could work - unless they've still pending litigation. I don't think I'm the most moral of people but I don't think I could live with myself if I'd done something along these lines. I really don't.

      Sure, it may seem trivial to some but, from my understanding, they made scads of money getting people to settle out of court for absurd amounts of money. These weren't the wealthy that they scammed. These were people who didn't know or couldn't know how to defend themselves in a court of law. These were people without recourse by ignorance (and the law is complex) and by financial class.

      How the hell do you come to terms with being that kind of prick? Oh, I know it's easy to rest your head on a pile of money and 1200 thread-count Egyptian cotton sheets. But, still... What did you do to acquire that wealth? Do you still have family and friends after you reached this low level? Are they a bunch of crazy fuckers too - and, perhaps, believe your side of the story?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    11. Re:HA by sribe · · Score: 1

      I've known some pretty crappy people but nobody who didn't have shame...

      Then you haven't known an actual sociopath. Good for you. I mean that sincerely, not sarcastically.

    12. Re:HA by KGIII · · Score: 1

      That is probably true and, for that, I'm grateful. I did actually have a relationship with a lady who nearly fits the description and *might* fit as I could just be deluding myself into thinking there was some empathy and something other than greed or self-interest inside. :/

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    13. Re:HA by sribe · · Score: 1

      ...I did actually have a relationship with a lady who nearly fits the description and *might* fit as I could just be deluding myself into thinking there was some empathy and something other than greed or self-interest inside. :/

      The successful ones become really good at mimicking normal reactions, so it's hard to tell unless the relationship goes on way longer than is healthy... Best to extricate ASAP, and let somebody else discover the answer to that question!

    14. Re:HA by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      I think this guy is probably a leading candidate for Gitmo. Lock 'em away.

    15. Re:HA by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I actually paid that one to go away on the advice of my lawyer. She still has a car that's in my name but I've no idea what happened to it. I don't even really care. She was straight up evil and completely dishonest. The relationship didn't last long. I tolerated some verbal abuse once and figured it might be a bad day. The second time, she had to go. That was when a few other things were shared with me by other people who didn't want to tell me because they didn't want to interfere. Thanks guys! *sighs*

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    16. Re:HA by sribe · · Score: 1

      I tolerated some verbal abuse once and figured it might be a bad day. The second time, she had to go.

      So... You were a metric shit-ton smarter than I was. Sigh...

    17. Re:HA by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty tolerant and easy going but when it was so obviously habitual and ingrained, just by the way it was enacted, it was simply not something that I was going to accept nor have as a part of my life. The first time, I can forgive and forget. The second was not long after and was clearly showing that it was a character flaw. The reality is that she was with me for the money and, not to stroke my ego - it's not nor does it, I kind of have a bit.

      If she'd been smart, she'd have at least pretended better. She'd have made far more in the long run. I have since surmised that she was of the opinion that she was better than other people and that she was doing me a favor by gracing me with her presence and sexual favors. Sure, I can agree to part of that but let's negotiate a price first.

      She was a cutie and mostly made of plastic and silicone bits. She'd done some model work and then returned home with a black eye and a kid. That's where I came in. The people, the locals, who knew her did not warn me. It turns out, she has a history. Last I knew, she was in NM and doing something to someone for money, I'm sure. I kind of feel bad for the kid but that's not my job.

      So, on advice of a lawyer, I got a restraining order and then proceeded to fund her trip through my lawyer where she agreed that, in return for the money, she'd go away. She was supposed to leave the car, however. I guess, I didn't really give her enough money for a replacement car but, again, not my job. I didn't even have to give her the money to go away. Not counting the car, I think I paid her $10,000 to just go away. The car was an older (2007ish) Honda so no big loss. I do, sort of, miss the car. It was pretty nice for the price.

      The current missus looked over my shoulder (I don't hide shit now that we know each other well enough) and asked what she'd get when I got sick of her. What a horrible term, "current missus." Oh well. I told her as long as she's not a crazy psychopath then we'll not need to worry about such things. When we first met, there was no indication that I'd managed to accumulate a few dollars. I didn't lie about it nor did the question, directly, come up so I opted to not disclose it until after we'd resolved some issues and she seemed like a legitimate human being. So far so good but she does whack me once in a while. Abuse I tell you! Abuse! (Which is why she whacked me.)

      There's something to be said for dating a woman nearly forty years your junior.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  2. 1.2 million dollar condo... in Minnesota? by macraig · · Score: 2

    How does one manage to pay 1.2 million dollars for a condo in Minnesota? Are real estate prices really that insane there? It ain't San Francisco.

    And what happened to John Steele, who practically started this whole damned business model and now seems to have escaped under the radar? I've seen no reporting on his fate since Prenda Law fell apart.

    1. Re:1.2 million dollar condo... in Minnesota? by swb · · Score: 1

      How does one manage to pay 1.2 million dollars for a condo in Minnesota? Are real estate prices really that insane there? It ain't San Francisco.

      You just answered your own question. It ain't San Francisco, which is why people will pay a lot to live here.

      IIRC, they lived in the Carlyle, a luxury downtown highrise building. It's a really nice building and their condo is on a high floor and probably pretty large, I'd guess over 2000 square feet and probably is a unit with views of both the river and the skyline.

    2. Re:1.2 million dollar condo... in Minnesota? by ktetch-pirate · · Score: 1

      correct on all but the size, its just under 1800sq ft, here is a link to zazzle for their specific condo in the puece.

    3. Re:1.2 million dollar condo... in Minnesota? by darthsilun · · Score: 1

      What, are you like Dr. Evil; did you just wake up after being frozen in the 60s?

      $1M ($1.2M even) ain't what it used to be.

    4. Re: 1.2 million dollar condo... in Minnesota? by jimmybuffet · · Score: 2

      The twin cities (Minneapolis, St Paul) is actually a fairly expensive area to live (I've lived there). Rochester, MN also has some expensive realestate.

    5. Re:1.2 million dollar condo... in Minnesota? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      And what happened to John Steele, who practically started this whole damned business model and now seems to have escaped under the radar? I've seen no reporting on his fate since Prenda Law fell apart.

      My guess is that he's moved far away and is practising some new (but similar) scam under (yet another) assumed (possibly stolen) identity. Eventually, he'll slip up or someone will make the connection, and then we'll hear lots more about him.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    6. Re:1.2 million dollar condo... in Minnesota? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Sorry. That's sort of beyond the limits of what I am willing to accept.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    7. Re:1.2 million dollar condo... in Minnesota? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      A fancy condo really near downtown (such as the ones nine or ten blocks from my house) will run you that. I have no idea why, but I'm hoping it will shore up my property values.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  3. Good. by wjcofkc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's been nice to see over the past few years more stories about patent trolls going down hard rather than getting away with theft. It seems to coincide with a certain judge in Texas retiring.

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    1. Re:Good. by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Didn't realize that jerk retired. Reign of terror is over I hope?

  4. The karma... by Raved+Thrad · · Score: 1

    ...IS OVER 9000!!

    --
    Life, ultimately, boils down to the Four Fs: Fighting, Fleeing, Feeding, and Mating.
  5. You'd be surprised by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    Just how much money is out there. The rich don't flaunt their money any more. It keeps the pleebs from noticing and keeps the "We're broke, so we need more Austerity" myth going...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:You'd be surprised by KGIII · · Score: 1

      That's really not a whole lot. People in SF pay that much on a regular basis and they actually (probably) do a little work for their money. It might seem like it's a lot but you can spend that on a good coke binge and chunk of ocean front property in Panama City, Florida. Hell, that's not even on the *good* side of the inlet in PCB.

      Err... You might have enough left to buy the ladies a couple of nice gifts but not a whole lot really. It's not what it used to be. Not that I'd recommend going on a coking binge and buying a piece of property in Florida or anything but, you know, it could happen.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    2. Re:You'd be surprised by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      There's that little company called 3M - Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing... There's a LOT of money in the Midwest, it's just not as flashy as Silicon Valley riches.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    3. Re:You'd be surprised by vovin · · Score: 1

      There are 18 Fortune 500 companies in Minnesota. 17 of which are in the metropolitan area of Minneapolis-St. Paul.
      There is also Cargill .. which Forbes' lists as the largest private company. Actually valuation is now known but is estimated around 55 billion. (more than double ADM at a market cap of 21 billion).
      There is also Carlson which owns hotel changes, and resorts such as Radisson, among others.

      So yeah. There is a lot of money here.

  6. Ha ha ha ha by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My insightful commentary on this is, "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Ha ha ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is indeed hard to come up with more insightful commentary when laughing so hard. Instead I'll refer to an unoriginal quote:

      The wheels of justice grind very slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine.

      Goodbye, Prenda Law.

  7. Meaning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's not karma; unless there is solid evidence they died and this is their reincarnation.

    How about justice, I think that's a better work to use in this case, eh?

  8. Too bad we couldnt do that to Darl McBride by voss · · Score: 1

    Mr. Sco deserved that

  9. Re:How did this get past the LLC? by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

    He might have, but even if he did an LLC is no where near an impenetrable shield. Especially with small businesses. You want a shield? Get big enough to afford a lobbyist or 10.

    If you really piss off the wrong federal judge, lobbyists won't help you. They all have to be political enough to get elected, but only about half are political animals, strong figures in local party, etc...; they other half are really smart people with experience as a judge who have basically settled into the single most secure job in the world.

    All of them tend to follow the law, but the law can be pretty flexible and go against you if you piss them off too much.

  10. Bankruptcy Attorney Here by spartacus_prime · · Score: 2

    By filing Chapter 13 initially, this guy was hoping to hold onto his assets, including the condo. TFA indicates that the maximum creditors could receive would be $161,400, which seems outrageously low for a debt load in the millions. I hate Chapter 13s because they are so numbers-intensive, and for people desperately wanting to hold onto their house (or car, or what have you), often times the numbers don't work. By converting to a 7, he basically loses all assets of a significant value that he cannot fully exempt from liquidation. So the condo, any vehicles with significant equity, all are seized by the Chapter 7 Trustee. He won't lose most personal effects, since the courts aren't going to waste their time taking the shirt off his back.

    But if the DOJ is looking into this, he's fucked. Bankruptcy fraud was what sent the Giudices to prison, and I have had at least one client catch the eye of the DOJ in the past.

    The real question now will be how long the liquidation and disbursement process will take. If they find other assets, it could very well last beyond the 5-year period of a Chapter 13.

    --
    If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.
  11. Why is Hansmeier not shielded by the corporation? by Tolvor · · Score: 1

    I read TFA, as well as the past articles. What I don't understand is how the individual, Hansmeier, is financially responsible for the liabilities of the corporation, Prenda. I understand that an employee of the organization, even the head or CEO, can go to jail (ex Enron or Tyco), disbarred, and/or fired. However one of the purpose of forming a business entity is to protect the individual assets in case of corporate disaster. Are all employees liable when a corporation goes bankrupt, or just the corporate officers?

  12. Re:How did this get past the LLC? by colinwb · · Score: 1

    "All of them tend to follow the law, but the law can be pretty flexible and go against you if you piss them off too much."

    A personal experience to support that. About ten years ago I was an observer in a court case where an Independent Financial Advisor (IFA) was trying to overturn a judgement against him by an ombudsman. The lawyer for the IFA expounded arguments at length, and I got the distinct impression that (a) the judge wasn't exactly impressed by the length of time that lawyer was taking, including some near repetition of arguments, and (b) that if the argument for overturning the ombudsman's judgement was essentially a "technical" one (and it was) then the judge wasn't going to let legal technicalities get in the way of justice if he could help it. In other words, if the legal technicalities were cast iron, then the IFA would (perhaps regrettably) win, but if there was any room at all for ignoring those technicalities then they were going to be ignored.

    So my advice (warning - I am not a lawyer) is that if you are trying to evade "justice" (whatever that is) by using legal technicalities and loopholes you are - using the words of the parent - liable to "piss off" the judge, and I don't recommend that unless your case is watertight and bullet-proof.

  13. Doesnt this worry anyone by OsixPegasus · · Score: 1

    When the so called "assets" wind up including the patents and yet another greed patent troll buys them on the cheep?