DC Judge Approved Mass File-Sharing LawsuitAdded: Wednesday, April 13th, 2011
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Ridiculous Criminal Trials
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
US District Court Judge decided that alleged file-sharers can indeed be lumped together in one lawsuit from various court jurisdictions. Besides, Judge Beryl Howell ruled that broadband provider Time Warner failed to make a convincing case as to why the ISP can only perform 28 IP address lookups monthly, because some other Internet providers can perform more.
Despite suffering several legal setbacks, anti-piracy outfit named the US Copyright Group keeps fighting and somehow has managed to convince a judge to allow 3 mass lawsuits to proceed. The USCG tried to target over 4,500 individuals last year, but had to reduce the number to only 139 under the order of Judge Rosemary Collyer who ruled that the list must only include the defendants whom the outfit reasonably believes the Court has personal jurisdiction over. After this, another US District Judge decided that the Adult Copyright Company couldn’t lump the defendants in a single lawsuit because committing the same kind of copyright violation doesn’t make the defendants part of the same crime.
However, in this separate case, brought by the US Copyright Group on behalf of the Maverick Entertainment Group, US District Court Judge didn’t pay attention to all these concerns, saying that the defendants are indeed logically related, which means that they meet the requirements for permissive joinder. Still, the judge admitted that after they’ve been identified by the anti-piracy outfit they may then argue as to why they are improperly joined. In addition, Judge Howell believes that mass litigation is in the best interests of rights owners as it enables them to protect their legal rights. Otherwise, the outfit would be forced to file thousands separate cases and pay the Court filing fees for each of the cases. All this is supposed to limit the ability of the copyright holders to protect their legal rights.
Talking about jurisdiction, Judge Howell said that IP addresses by themselves can’t satisfy the determination, because IP lookup tool is only able to reveal where an accused individual is “likely” to reside. This way, the question of jurisdiction can’t be fully evaluated until the defendants are properly identified.
Finally, Judge Howell expressed an opinion that Internet service provider Time Warner has failed to make a good case for why IP address lookups can only be limited to 28 a month, pointing out that some other providers could handle more monthly lookups.
April 13th,2011Posted by:
Wednesday, April 13th, 2011
|Thanx For The Information|
|This is the same Judge that was a lobbyist for the copyright holders and now is a judge in their ruling overturned previous judges rulings. All that has happened is the USCG just judge shopped until they finally got to her and got what they wanted; BUT anyone served can should and will use the other judges rulings as a jurisdiction defense.|
If this moronic judges ruling stands then I can sue some one in another state and not have to go to that defendants state to file the case.. Very dangerous grounds this judge is on...
|posted by (2011-04-14 12:11:28)|
|more proof of how corrupt the system is, took 3 judges for them to get approval. how much did they pay for this outcome?? judges have to much power. ftw||
Most Popular Stories