First, Plaintiff has motioned the court for a default judgement and sanctions against Mr. Harris for non-compliance with the courts mandate to meet and confer with Plaintiff. I will follow-up on this development in an upcoming post. Bottom line: Even if you really dislike the Plaintiff/Troll, you may have to deal with them and not anger the judge. Take the high road and don’t let the Troll play you. Initial article on the AZ Eight
Second, Troll Goodhue/AF Holdings LLC/Prenda appears to be trying something new with the courts. On 14 Feb 13, Troll Goodhue filed a Motion for the Authorizing Issuance of Subpoenas. Motion_ISP_Subpoena_02144(AZ) Funny thing about the motion is it was signed by Troll Goodhue on 4 Jan 13, but didn’t make it into the docket until 14 Feb 13. It appears troll Goodhue/Prenda had this ready since 4 Jan 13, but had to hold off for some reason. You should also note that the court signed the subpoena on 5 Feb 13 (details below). So the court approved the subpoena on 5 Feb 13, but the Troll motion for it didn’t make it onto PACER until 14 Feb 13. Yes I know PACER is not the best, but this is still odd.
Now the motion for the subpoena mentions that they are trying to identify Mr. Harris’s co-conspirators.
The limited discovery would consist of the issuance of subpoenas on relevant Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”) seeking the Defendant’s co-conspirators’ names, current (and permanent) addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, and Media Access Control addresses.
But in true Prenda fashion, no details are provided as to the specific public IP addresses they are seeking subscriber information from. Troll Goodhue goes on to tell the court they need this information to prosecute Mr. Harris. They further state as the infringement is “ongoing and continuous,” they require immediate relief to prevent further harm. Troll Goodhue then tells the court that without this information, they will not be able to commence the law suit. My god! What a load of crap! The Harris case (and the seven other AZ Does cases) originally came from DC case # 1:11-cv-01274, AF Holdings LLC, v. Does 1-1140), that was closed in February 2012. With that many Does in a case, even an idiot Troll would have been able to find some supporting evidence.
I have checked PACER, but failed to find anything to show that the subpoena was authorized by the court. That is until comments to this site started to show up.
On 5 Feb 13, the court authorized the subpoena and Troll Goodhue/Prenda served it on the ISP. HarrisSubp_PartDeux_01244(AZ) The subpoena lists out 71 Arizona public IP addresses with a date range of 1 Oct 12 – 1 Feb 13 (4 months). Another “interesting” aspect of the public IP addresses listed is they are ALL assigned to Cox Communications, Inc.
This seriously looks like Troll Goodhue/Prenda are taking advantage of the court here to claim that for a perfect 4 month period, 71 Arizona public IP addresses (ONLY from Cox Communications???) were co-conspirators with Mr. Harris. So I guess ONLY people from Arizona (and Cox), were infringing from Mr. Harris’ public IP address. NOBODY from any of the other 49 States (or other ISPs in AZ) decided to infringe at that time I guess.
Plus take a look at the motion and actual subpoena. There is no details concerning the movie in question or Mr. Harris’ public IP address during 1 Oct 12 – 1 Feb 13 period. As the Harris case only has a claim for the movie “Sexual Obsession,” I will go with that for the time being. The big problem is with “What was Mr. Harris’ public IP address during the 4-month period?“ How does troll Goodhue/Prenda know it is the same IP address as when they recorded it on 3 Jun 11 (Original DCD case # 1:11-cv-01274)? As there appears to be some vital information missing from PACER, I getting a sneaking suspicion it was left out on purpose. This is not a good sign. The court should have been asking some very simple questions to at least show there was prima facie evidence to support a subpoena. Something a little more detailed than what Troll Goodhue told the court – “Trust Me.”
Even if is was Mr. Harris’ public IP address that is showing up as a BitTorrent client (Oct 12 – Feb 13), Plaintiff needs to show the direct link back to him. As far as the docket shows, the only linkage is from the ISP data that was reported to Prenda in 2011. Again, I cannot believe the court would miss such an obvious detail.
According to the Cox cover letter, the 71 people have until 31 Mar 13, to show that they are fighting the release of their personal information. Once the information is released, you can expect Prenda Law/Troll Goodhue to send out its usual settlement letters and to start calling the Does.
Now depending on what CA Judge Otis Wright decided to do with ex-Prenda attorney Brett Gibbs (and the other members of the clown posse), the AF Holdings LLC cases could slow down. In reality I don’t expect Prenda to stop until they are placed in a jail cell with no phones or Internet access. Fightcopyrighttrolls article Popehat Article Ars Technica Article
More to come on this new Prenda move. As this originally started from 1140 Doe case in DCD, I expect other locations may be seeing similar activity. Be On The Lookout (BOLO) for the Prenda Spin! If you are an AZ Doe, please post a comment or send me an email.