4 Apr Update – Tangled Weave of Deception – Lynn Peak Productions, Colorado Copyright Troll Cases

4 Apr 14 – Update

On 26 Mar 14, Troll Kannady/Plaintiff did exactly what we expected them to do on case 1:13-cv-02921, Lynn Peak Productions, Inc. v. Does 1, et al (26 Does).  They motioned the court to dismiss the case without prejudice against the remaining 22 Does.   Vol_Dismiss_02921(CO)   The reason given was -

Pursuant to this Court’s previous Order, the Plaintiff has pursued pretrial discovery by seeking to determine, via subpoena of the Defendant Does’ ISPs providers, the identity of each Doe Defendant. The Plaintiff has sent correspondence to individuals it has been able to identify via subpoenaed records to determine the culpability of each of the Doe Defendant. After review of the subpoenaed records and responses to Plaintiff’s correspondence, Plaintiff has determined it will dismiss this case against the Doe Defendants pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) as none of the Defendants have filed an Answer or Motion for Summary Judgment in this Matter. Should Plaintiff elect to pursue this action against the identified Doe Defendants, it will pursue such action in separate litigation and name each Doe Defendant individually.

What this really says is that Troll Kannady sent settlement demand letters to the ISP subscribers which they either ignored or told him to “piss up a rope.”  On 1 Apr 14, Senior Judge Daniel issued the order dismissing all remaining Does without prejudice.   Case_Dismiss_Order_02921(CO)   I would expect that other Lynn Peak CO cases go the same way.  So all my Colorado friends should take this action to mean Lynn Peak is NOT prepared to go forward with these cases only on the public IP addresses they recorded.  Now, Troll/Plaintiff could refile cases against these people, but it would just be a waste of a filing fee without any new evidence to back up their allegations.  Hopefully the CO judges will start to see the true nature of these bozos and shut their operations down.

Cheers,

DTD :)

—————————————————————–

30 Jan 14 – Update

Here is another settlement letter from troll Kannady.   AssaultWS_Set_Ltr_B&K    Same as before, but also includes the FAQ sheet and the Settlement/Release Agreement.

23 Jan 14 – Update

Here is a copy of a settlement letter from Troll Scott Thomas Kannady, Brown & Kannady, Denver, CO.  Plaintiff/Troll seem to think that their mediocre (my opinion) movie (Assault on Wall Street, AKA: Bailout: The Age of greed) is worth $5,000 – $8000 per alleged BitTorrent copyright infringer.   BK_SettlementLtr_13cv02974

The settlement letter is clearly a copy of the following one for the movie, The Power of Few.  What I found really low-ball and disrespectful was that Troll Kannady doesn’t even have the common decency t put a REAL signature on the letters.  This truly shows you what type of operation we are dealing with.

I did a quick count of the Lynn Peak Productions/Bailout: The Age of greed cases and came up with 354 Does.  If Troll/Plaintiff could get 100% early settlement ($5K), the settlements generated would be $1,770,000.  Being a little more realistic lets use 75% – $ 1,327,500.  Worst case scenario of 50% – $885.000.  Still, not a bad return on investment I bet.   I have 12 cases filed, so the filing fee is $4,800.  Pay the Technical monitoring company (Crystal Bay Corporation), and deduct some hours for the additional work Troll Kannady (and others) will do.  No more than approx. $300 per hour.  Hell, lets set the fees and cost at $30,000.  Even at the worst case, that would still leave Plaintiff/Troll with approx. $850,200 to split between the Copyright owner and the attorney.  The thing I find truly ironic is the name of this movie in Canada – Bailout – The Age of Greed.  Go Figure.

13 Dec 14 – Update

Thank you attorney J. Christopher Lynch, for finding this little gem concerning the Crystal Bay Corporation (CBC).  This information was filed in case 2:13-cv-00395, Elf-Man LLC v. Lamberson (WAED).  It appears the people behind CBC have not filed the required paperwork with the SD Secretary of State, and the corporation has fallen into delinquent status.

CBC1

FYI – here is a LINK to a listing of Secretary of State Business Name Search sites.

So if you have a case that used CBC data, please take the time to inform the courts.

DTD :)

18 Dec 13 – Update

On 10 Dec 13, Troll Kannady filed his monthly status report for all the Lynn Peak Productions cases in Colorado.  1:13-cv-02911, 1:13-cv-02921, 1:13-cv-02974, 1:13-cv-02984, 1:13-cv-02998, 1:13-cv-023026, 1:13-cv-03056, 1:13-cv-03071, 1:13-cv-03079, 1:13-cv-03100, & 1:13-cv-03203.   Of the 11 cases listed, seven of them have had subpoenas issued to the ISP.  The remaining four cases are still waiting for the court to rule on their motion for early discovery.  There is no mention of if any Does have contact Troll Kannady and/or if settlements have been reached.  The fact that some of the cases have not been granted earlier discovery could be a good sign.  The court may have some issues with how Plaintiff is running these cases.   DecStatus_Doc11_02911(CO)

29 Nov 13 – Update

The following order comes from a TN court in which the judge decided on his own (sua sponte) to sever all the Does except for Doe #1, as well as quash the subpoena to the ISP.   DoesSevered_TCYK_00251(TN).   Yes it is for the Plaintiff TCYK, but there is some linkage of that movie/Plaintiff to Lynn Peak Productions (My opinion).  As I pointed out in the main post, the email address on the copyright registration is “legal@brightlightpictures.com.”  This is what Bright Light Picture does -

Brightlight Pictures develops, packages and produces independent feature films and television projects. Brightlight’s Chairman, Shawn Williamson, has produced more than 90 productions in the last 15 years and over 35 productions since launching Brightlight in 2001 including WHITE NOISE starring Michael Keaton, which has grossed over $100 million since its world-wide theatrical release in 2005. Recently Williamson has worked as a producer on the feature film HORNS starring Daniel Radcliffe, for Mandalay and Red Granite Pictures; 50/50 starring Seth Rogen and Joseph Gordon-Levitt; and THE COMPANY YOU KEEP, a Sony Pictures Classics release for spring 2013 directed by Robert Redford and starring Robert Redford and Shia LaBeouf.

Read the order and you will see that a Doe filed a motion and the Plaintiff made a deal with him for a dismissal.  The judge appears to have taken the deal to mean that Plaintiff wasn’t serious about actually going after the infringers and decided not to let the opportunity pass him by.  We can only hope the CO court starts to see what the Trolls are doing and makes it harder.

DTD :)

————————————————————————————

LQ1One of the Copyright Troll hotspots is the State of Colorado.  Probably not as much of a target rich environment as Illinois, but there is still enough BitTorrent downloaders to make it worth it for a Troll/Plaintiff.  The Colorado court has historically allowed single and mass-Doe cases respectively.  I will say that Judge Michael E. Hegarty does require monthly status updates from the Troll, but otherwise the cases generally drag on until the Trolls dismiss them following a lengthy settlement negotiation period.  I do wish the Colorado court would stop allowing mass-Doe cases solely based on SHA-1 hashsum of a BitTorrent swarm – especially when there is NO evidence to show real joinder between each of the IP addresses and their BitTorrent usage.

Since June 2013, there have been over 100 BitTorrent copyright infringement cases opened in Colorado.  Plaintiffs include Lynn Peak Productions, TCYK, Malibu Media, The Power of Few, reFX Audio Software, Instinctive Film GmbH, and Purzel Video GmbH.

The most recent Troll/Plaintiff is Lynn Peak Productions, a Canadian company.  Previous postings on Lynn Peak Productions.    As I initially stated, these Colorado case have the stink of the older mass-Doe porn-copyright troll cases akin to Prenda Law.  I’m not saying Lynn Peak seeded the movie to BitTorrent – I make no such claims.  What is interesting is company that conducted the BitTorrent monitoring and point of contact on the Copyright registration.

Crystal Bay Corporation

Crystal Bay Corporation (CBC) is a South Dakota “Shelf Corporation.”  CBC was incorporated by David Deloach, a disbarred California attorney.  Mr. Deloach’s Web site, Corp 95, sells these ready-made corporations for approx. $1200.

Anonymous entity where your name is not on any public document! These companies already exist and are complete with Articles, and registered agents. We have formed these entities ourselves and offer Nevada and Wyoming LLCs and corporations that are guaranteed free of tax debt, bad credit history or litigation. They will be transferred to the buyer in good standing. You may have these complete companies within one hour! If you wish, we can change the names of the companies for only the filing fee. Pricing is listed after the name.

Check out the bottom of his Web site where there is a special note to Canadians, Like Lynn Peak Productions.

You can own your own company in the U.S. and can open and sign on a U.S. bank account on behalf of your company without a social security number.

Call and tell us you are Canadian and we will provide a specialist.

Now I don’t think Mr. Deloach is part of Lynn Peak or this effort.  He is most likely only the person who set-up and sold CBC to the otherwise unknown person/entity.  It still interesting to note that the Plaintiff here uses a shelf corporation incorporated by a disbarred CA attorney running this business out of a Dana Point, CA, mail drop.  BTW Mr. Deloach, is this you in 1969?  1969 News Article.   Previous post involving CBC.

Why hire a BitTorrent technical monitoring company formed from a ready-made “Shelf?”  Because to find out who is actually behind it, as well as the forensic qualifications, certification, and experience (or the lack of them) will be extremely hard to do.  Mr. Darren M. Griffin, Software consultant, CBC, is the one who makes the declarations supporting the motion to take early discovery and obtain the ISP subscriber data.  This is at a minimum an avenue of inquiry for a Doe defender if these cases ever reach the discovery phase.  My belief is that CBC is very similar to Prenda Law’s 6881 Forensics and the Troll/Plaintiff will close down cases before they are forced to disclose details of its operations and organization.

Darren Griffen Documents6-main  6-1  6-2

Bright Light Pictures

BLP1For the Lynn Peak Productions cases, the Canadian company Bright Light Pictures is an otherwise quiet participant.  The only place you will find their name is in the Copyright Registration, under the “Rights and Permission” section.  A search of their site did disclose their involvement with a couple other movies that were part of Copyright Troll law suits, most notably, “The Company You Keep,” with over 100 copyright troll cases filed since April 2013.

I did email Bright Light Pictures, but they have failed to respond to my questions.  I also emailed Professor Paul Cohen, President, The Red Hills Motion Picture Releasing Company, LLC, concerning his knowledge of these law suits.

Film Distribution – Cohen, P. (2013). Assault on Wall Street, directed by Uwe Boll, produced by Lynn Peak Productions. The Red Hills Motion Picture Releasing Company.

Professor Cohen has not responded to my questions.

I expect that during the first part of December 2013, the ISP will start to release the subscriber information to Troll Scott T. Kannady.  Soon after we will begin to see the settlement letters go out.  I have heard from one Doe is another Troll Kannady case (The Power of Few), in which the settlement demand was $5,000.    For the new CO Does, please send me copies of the settlement demand letters when they arrive.

DieTrollDie :)

STK1

About DieTrollDie

I'm one of the many 'John Does' (200,000+ & growing in the US) who Copyright Trolls have threatened with a civil law suit unless they are paid off. What is a Copyright Troll? Check out the Electronic Frontier Foundation link - http://www.eff.org/issues/copyright-trolls
This entry was posted in Non-Porn cases and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to 4 Apr Update – Tangled Weave of Deception – Lynn Peak Productions, Colorado Copyright Troll Cases

  1. ericsmiles says:

    Thank you for the update.

  2. Raul says:

    Great post. With these guys there is always some dirt.

  3. Peter Singer says:

    To whom it may concern. The law firm Brown & Kannady, LLC in Denver, Colorado is currently performing a particularly insidious form of legal intimidation known “copyright trolling.” For shame! If you have received a threatening letter from this firm please do not panic. These charlatans are merely attempting to frighten you into giving them money. Their client has no intention of ever revealing your name to the public or proceeding to trial because these measures would be too difficult (costly) for them to pursue. To the Does they implicate, simply ignore these sad bottom-feeders. Do not involve yourself with this firm and do not believe them to be of any consequence. Thank you.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      I would not simply ignore these guys or any other Troll. Don’t give in and do want you can to make the situation work for you. A complete ignore could result in a default judgement. Don’t let that happen.

      DTD :)

  4. AnonymousJD says:

    DTD,

    Although Hegarty has required the plaintiffs to file monthly status reports, he is not enforcing it. I am part of one of the BKGTH cases that was filed in Jun/Jul and have only seen one status report thus far. All defendants motions I have seen on the docket for my case have been denied.

    JD

  5. DieTrollDie says:

    On 25 Nov 13, I have it on good authority that both Bright Light Pictures and Bridge Studios received an email from me and failed to respond in any fashion. Not too surprising, as I expect them to try and keep their operations out of the public eye. Well that is going to be hard when the settlement demand letters reach the ISP subscribers in the near future. I expect a $5K settlement demand, but this could change.

    DTD :)

  6. DieTrollDie says:

    Here is a settlement letter from Troll Scott Kannady for the movie, “The Power Of Few.” If you settle quickly, it will ONLY cost you $5K. Past the short settlement period and it goes up to $8K!!!! What a load of crap! http://dietrolldie.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/thepowerfew_settleltr.pdf $5-8K for a $8-15 DVD. The movie appears to have been a real dog at the box office and cost more than it made. Go figure.

    DTD :)

  7. DieTrollDie says:

    I wondered when it would start. Here it is. New case in Iowa (12 Dec 13). http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copyright-lawsuits/iowa-northern-district-court/670228/bailout-the-age-of-greed-v-does-1-28/summary/ BUT, the Plaintiff is “Bailout: The Age of Greed” which is the Canadian title of “Assault on Wall Street.”

  8. DieTrollDie says:

    Here is the RECAP of the Iowa case http://ia601302.us.archive.org/27/items/gov.uscourts.iand.41340/gov.uscourts.iand.41340.docket.html. 28 Does. Troll Jay R. Hamilton, HAMILTON IP LAW, PC.

  9. DieTrollDie says:

    Well I think the bright minds at Hamilton IP Law made a bit of a mistake. Take a look at Exhibit B to the complaint. Yes, there are two different SHA-1 hash file numbers. You cannot claim joinder with different SHA-1 hash files. The movie may be the same, BUT the file that is shared is different and there is NO WAY different SHA-1 hash files are shared via BT. Lets see if they sever the Does themselves or a motion has to be filed. Just plain stupid. http://dietrolldie.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/complaint_exb_01039ia.pdf

    DTD :)

    • DieTrollDie says:

      Does 1-17 have a date range of 7 Jul – 4 Sep 13, and SHA-1 hash # B96958C3EA12CE2146AFAA5031DFFB31669F97B5.

      Does 18-28 have a date range of 9 Jul – 25 Aug 13, and SHA-1 hash # 99F29436A41FA2E91B890703E9B1A43FC83605E4.

      DTD :)

    • SRT157 says:

      do u think this law firm is just trolling or do u think they will follow through. they are doing both shia lebeouf movies to, the company you keep and charlie something must die

      • DieTrollDie says:

        Based on the make-up of the cases and that they copies of previous cases that never went anywhere, my opinion is that they will go nowhere. Take a look at the history of these cases and you will see this. A very small number of default judgements, but no trials. This is a business that will not survive a trial.

        DTD :)

  10. DieTrollDie says:

    OK. I have heard that Troll Kannady has sent out settlement letters for the Lynn Peak cases. I have it that the initial time sensitive amount is $5K. If you do not pay by the cut-off date, they up the price to $8K! Lets see, a Blu-Ray copy of this mediocre (My opinion) movie is approx. $13 – http://www.amazon.com/Assault-Street-Blu-ray-Dominic-Purcell/dp/B00CFB6PD8. $5K / $13 = approx. 384. So someone would have to have shared the movie with 384 other people to add up to $5K. Even is they claim $1K in fees/costs, it would take approx. 307 people to download it to add up to $5K.

    DTD :)

  11. KJ says:

    Case is Doe 1-35. dated february 5th for supoena to have info from the ISP. this was for Assault on Wall Street that I know i didnt do – I have an open network connection for wifi. Found a lawyer that said he will do the paperwork and quash it for $750.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      The problem we have been having in CO, is the courts will most likely deny the motion to quash and/or serve the Does. That is unless the attorney is going to try some new angle. If you are worried about your name eventually being tied to the case (thus public record), you could hire an attorney to request to proceed anonymously or do it yourself.

      DTD :)

  12. JJ says:

    I’m kind of stuck here on what to do. I got a settlement request letter from Brown and Kannady. I just spoke with a lawyer who has dealt with Scott Kannady before and said he’s not very aggressive in most cases. I was basically advised to settle. After the $800 retainer, the lawyer can most likely get the $5000 dropped to $800-$1500. I really don’t know what I should do, I don’t have a lot of money.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      Here is my thoughts. If B&K isn’t very aggressive, why not wait it out. I haven’t heard of Lynn Peak actually naming/serving people. If possible, please email me a copy of the settlement letter.

      DTD :)

      • JJ says:

        Well I’m new to this so I don’t know what the odds of it going to trial or being named in the lawsuit are. I know I can’t have them going through my computer that’s for sure.
        The letter is basically identical to the one you posted above, I don’t have a digital copy or a scanner. They want $500 by the 21st or it goes up to $8000.

      • JJ says:

        Also, I don’t know if it matters but I didn’t share this movie with anyone. I didn’t even watch it to be perfectly honest.

  13. 77 says:

    Ok, so I’m real lost I’m one of those people tangled in this web of BS and hit with being sued over “bailout” please tell me that I’m not going to have to pay 5,000 dollars for something I don’t even have clue about ???? Serious WTF ?

    • DieTrollDie says:

      The Troll/Plaintiff doesn’t really care if you did it or not. They just want you to pay them the settlement. They cannot force you to pay the settlement. If you decide to ignore them or tell them to get lost (call or email), they have two options – 1) Keep bugging you and eventually close the case with no settlement. OR 2) Name and serve you with a complaint

      We haven’t seen this Plaintiff do this and based on the mass Doe case style, it is unlikely that this will happen. All they have is the ISP records showing who the ISP subscriber is. They know full well it doesn’t mean the ISP subscriber did it (or even that a family member did it).

      The name and serve option is dangerous for the Troll/Plaintiff. If an ISP subscriber (and family) deny the allegations and no evidence is found, it looks bad for them – as well as what it costs them to take it that far – time & money. As well as it shows how weak their claims are. Most likely they will not take this option unless that think a person is a good candidate for a default judgement. You can call or write them to tell them you didn’t do it and to leave you alone, but it is no guarantee.

      For this Plaintiff I suggest a wait and see approach right now. If served, get a lawyer to respond OR you can answer the complaint yourself – see my ‘Defendant Answer’ page. I would also suggest you get a free consult from a firm that has dealt with these guys.

      DTD :)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s