Prenda Law ordered to pay $261K to defendants(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
Prenda Law ordered to pay $261K to defendants
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/unhappy-thanksgiving-for-prenda-law-ordered-to-pay-261k-to-defendants/
7 comments
>The Prenda "porn trolls" were really
just an annoyance to the ISPs until
they sued the companies; that put
AT&T and Comcast in a situation
where "they will be strongly
motivated to win the case and
ensure that no one tries this tactic
again," wrote Lee.
If they hadn't sued Comcast and Bell, would the judgment be different?
If they hadn't sued Comcast and Bell, would the judgment be different?
The judgement on the case would probably not be much different, considering that the Prenda lawyers have also lost various other cases without naming any ISPs as defendants.
This order discusses a motion by Comcast and AT&T for attorney fees, which the judge deems appropriate because (a) Prenda unnecessarily elongated the process by naming the ISPs as co-defendants without any valid claim, and (b) as a reprimand for Prenda'a “willingness to lie to the Court” and “disregard […] of justice”.
The damages are tabulated as follows:
You can read the judgement yourself at https://ia600705.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.uscourts.ilsd.58...
This order discusses a motion by Comcast and AT&T for attorney fees, which the judge deems appropriate because (a) Prenda unnecessarily elongated the process by naming the ISPs as co-defendants without any valid claim, and (b) as a reprimand for Prenda'a “willingness to lie to the Court” and “disregard […] of justice”.
The damages are tabulated as follows:
Anthony Smith (main defendant)
187.2h á $200.00/h – $409.00/h → $72,367.00
AT&T
158.7h á $110.00/h – $295.00/h → $38,987.83 + $870.29
215.0h á $250.00/h – $555.00/h → $80,524.50 + $864.92
total $119,637.05
Comcast
132.0h á $212.50/h – $531.00/h → $57,144.23 + $806.98
36.9h á $300.00/h → $11,070.00
total $69,021.26
TOTAL JUDGEMENT: $261,025.11
You can read the judgement yourself at https://ia600705.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.uscourts.ilsd.58...
Very happy to see these cases be increasingly either laughed out of court or used to punish trolls.
i've been so sick of hearing about these guys "gaming" the justice system and getting away with it. perhaps there is hope.
Well, this case is a little more disappointing than you might think. Prenda's in so much trouble because they falsely represented to the court that they had an unrelated, copyright-holding client, when in fact they held the copyright (and kept all the money) themselves. No one is challenging the model of "own the copyright to a porn movie, and then sue people who download it" (although it has also been suggested that Prenda was the source of torrents for its movies, which would complicate its claims).
It cannot be proven that Prenda was responsible for the torrent in the first place (an IP address is not enough for proof of identity) but it's pretty much settled at this point that Prenda paid for the production of the pornography, had no intention of ever releasing the pornography for consumption, and posted the original torrent so that they could go after "infringers."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/08/21/quite-ama...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/08/21/quite-ama...
There is hope yet for the patent system in America.
This has nothing to do with patents. The article describes a case of copyright trolling, which is a completely different matter.
Of course there are similarities between copyright trolls and patent trolls: Both acquire certain rights and try to extort money out of small actors for allegedly infringing use. In both cases the troll's calculation is that the proposed settlement fee is just below the cost of an effective defense.
Of course there are similarities between copyright trolls and patent trolls: Both acquire certain rights and try to extort money out of small actors for allegedly infringing use. In both cases the troll's calculation is that the proposed settlement fee is just below the cost of an effective defense.
"Unlike other awards, Hansmeier, Steele and Duffy are __personally liable__ for this award." (emphasis added)
So they can't simply close up the firm and walk away from the carcass. Their own personal funds will disappear, which is actually the proper punishment for this type of action on their part.