A Prenda Copyright Troll Finally Pleaded Guilty (popehat.com)
"One of the attorneys behind the Prenda Law 'copyright trolling' scheme has pleaded guilty to federal charges of fraud and money laundering," reports Ars Technica. Long-time Slashdot reader Freshly Exhumed shares this article from the law blog Popehat:
The factual basis section -- which Steele admits is true (as to facts he knows) or that the government can prove (as to facts he doesn't know directly) -- is a startling 16 pages long [PDF] and lavishly documents the entire scheme, complete with many details that accusers have been pointing out for years. In short, Steele admits that he and Hansmeier used sham entities to obtain the copyright to (or in some cases film) porn, uploaded it to file-sharing websites, and then filed "false and deceptive" copyright suits against downloaders designed to conceal their role in distributing the films and their stake in the outcomes. They lied to courts themselves, sent others to court to lie, lied at depositions, lied in sworn affidavits, created sham entities as plaintiffs, created fraudulent hacking allegations to try to obtain discovery into the identity of downloaders, used "ruse defendants" (strawmen, in effect) to get courts to approve broad discovery into IP addresses.
Facing a maximum of 40 years in prison, Steele could get his sentence reduced if he testifies against Hansmeier, according to the article, and "Steele appears to have pinned all of his hopes on that option... I've seen a lot of plea agreements in a lot of federal cases, and I don't recall another one that so clearly conveyed the defendant utterly surrendering and accepting everything the government demanded, all in hopes of talking his sentence down later."
Facing a maximum of 40 years in prison, Steele could get his sentence reduced if he testifies against Hansmeier, according to the article, and "Steele appears to have pinned all of his hopes on that option... I've seen a lot of plea agreements in a lot of federal cases, and I don't recall another one that so clearly conveyed the defendant utterly surrendering and accepting everything the government demanded, all in hopes of talking his sentence down later."
So, pretty much like most DMCA filers and copyright trolls.
Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
many, many times
"A Prenda Copyright Troll Finally Plead Guilty"
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
http://www.americanbar.org/con... If you're going to be pedantic, at least correct it to the more commonly used "pled".
Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
Although I'm happy that this guy finally got nailed, there's still the bigger issue: The only reason that Prenda was able to make millions in the first place is because of a completely fucked legal system where it is impossible for a person to defend themself at a reasonable cost. In fact, this fuckery was the basis for their whole scam. "Pay me [some amount of money] or else I'll sue you, and even if you win, it will cost you more to defend yourself than it will to just settle."
And no, "loser pays" is not the answer because there are too many cases where the person who is right still loses.
Enjoy your reduced sentence Mr. Steele.
Muphry's Law at work.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Why is it usually the pedants that are aliterate these days?
In addition to the copyright stuff, Hansmeier also had a penchant for suing businesses for ADA violations.
http://kstp.com/news/ada-lawsu...
I recommend that his sentence be reduced from 40 years to 39 years in exchange for his complete cooperation.
Pedants are alliterative because Pendants Point-out Problems.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Crap. Pedants, not Pendants.
Stupid auto-correct.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
So has anyone seen these things? Considering that the lawyers/crooks scammed over $6 million using them, what did the victims end up with that caused so much trouble? This stuff is out there somewhere and it is probably easy to find.
Maybe they should have just become porn producers in the first place. They might have been able to make similar money for the same amount of effort and not ended up having to go to jail. They did produced two of the movies themselves.
This represents a case of epic stupidity. How dumb do you have to be to make some smut and then end up doing time in a federal pen because of it?
Why is Snark Required?
Think about how many lives he ruined.
It's easy to gloss it over because he just took a little piece here and there. Just a few thousand dollars. But he made up for it in volume.
Let's estimate how much he ruined people's lives. The agreement describes 6 million dollars of fraudulent copyright charges. Just as an estimate, assume that the average person makes $20 after taxes (you have to pay the charges with after-tax money)--maybe I'm off by 50% but it'll at least be good as an estimate. That means that 300000 hours of people's lives went to pay for this. Assume that people can work 16 hours a day and you have over 50 years of human beings doing nothing but work 112 hour weeks, eating, and sleeping to pay fraudulent charges.
He's just doing it piecemeal, instead of pushing all the 300000 hours on a single person. But it still adds up. Of course I'm probably off by some factor here (the victims still need to pay for food and housing while working the 50 years, for instance--how do you account for that?) but it seems like 39 years in prison is reasonably close to the damage he caused.
In English it's plead, in American it can be spelt without the 'a'.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
On one hand, I see your point. On the other hand, these guy's business model was to threaten to ruin other people's lives in order to get them to pay up, they wasted an enormous amount of court time in order to do it, and they profusely lied about it even though they were lawyers sworn to obey the law and to honestly represent their case. That should total up to a pretty harsh sentence. I'm no judge, but 40 years does seem like a bit much. I don't see anything wrong with 5 or 10.
The scourge of aliteracy is completely separate from the (also disturbing) scourge of alliteracy.
Or as a great leader once said, "Brain brain and brain, what is brain?!"
Prison is supposed to be correctional, not retributional.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.