Commercial invoicing Failed, Once AgainAdded: Wednesday, November 21st, 2012
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.extratorrent.com
Plenty of lawsuits against thousands of people at one go are considered by the media a “copyright trolling”, and some judges are already aware of such technique. That’s why they don’t put up with them. One of them is Massachusetts’ federal Judge Leo Sorokin.
The case in question involves several publishers of porn content: they wanted to sue thousands of people for copyright infringement. One of the plaintiffs is Patrick Collins Inc., which filed a lawsuit against almost a dozen thousand of John Does. However, the problem is that they have failed to name any of the defendants.
The judge claimed that the Plaintiffs failed to articulate a discovery plan to identify the infringers at the first place, and they couldn’t even articulate the specific data they need for identifying them. In fact, when the judge asked the company’s attorney with what kind information he could help, they replied there was no specific set of data they needed. Since the company wanted to keep the issue as least burdensome and as least costly as possible, they believed that opening communications between their attorney and the Does was the best course of action.
As such, the plaintiffs asked the judge for the subscribers’ names, but were not going to move forward with the legal procedures. The judge replied that the history of this litigation surely proved a lack of interest in actually litigating the case against the specific defendants. In other words, the company has repeatedly said one thing and done another. The judge noted that their counsel has also repeatedly said to the undersigned, and to other judicial officers that he was going to litigate the claims they have brought. However, thus far, counsel has sued well in excess of one thousand Doe Defendants in the district, and as far as the judge was aware, he has never served a complaint upon a single individual defendant.
That’s why the company was given an ultimatum to provide the court with the reason why this lawsuit was filed at all.
November 21st,2012Posted by:
Wednesday, November 21st, 2012
|posted by (2012-11-23 00:16:57)|
|Sam this all German homework neatly done over there in the US or Australia ? Commercial invoing is like water boarding. The term should not exist.|
when we givefist strideto those we rather not mention in reguard to the war is this the polite approach? Without question.
Don't get me wrong, but commercial invoicing is too lose a term. We don't even call it water boarding, it's pronounced as, boggie boarding.
Looks good as an article holding ground with merit, but it can be made to serve the Darkside.
Most Popular Stories