“To The Point” – Judge Wilkins Kicks Prenda in the Junk, Misc. Action No. 12-mc-00150 (RLW)

Sometimes an image can say it all.


Thanks SJD and Raul for getting this out first.  This is such a nice read.  Court_Opinion_00150(DC)       Docket

I will admit I wish the judge was harsher on Prenda, but all the issues he brings up and then slaps back down is funny to read.  It is akin to a Three Stooges episode.  Too bad this is real life and our courts are so slow to address this problem.  It is common knowledge in the Federal courts that Copyright Trolls are making a mockery of the system.  No one denies that copyright infringement occurs or that the content owners have a right to fight back.  What they don’t have is the right to set-up a business model to extort money from alleged infringers and use the Federal court as a tool.

There are so many parts in this Memorandum Opinion that can be (and will be) cited by Does and Defense attorneys for ongoing and future cases.  I will add/update this post to highlight certain parts, but for now I will leave you with this from the beginning of the opinion:

On December 16, 2012, merely nine days later, Millennium voluntarily dismissed the action without explanation. As Comcast opines, a very likely explanation for Millennium’s dismissal – especially in light of Millennium’s subsequent actions – is that the undersigned had previously imposed restrictions upon plaintiffs who had brought a similar copyright infringement case, and Millennium therefore preferred to litigate before what it considered to be a more favorable forum. In that prior case, the undersigned held that the applicable venue statute in copyright actions, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(a), effectively requires every defendant to be a resident of the state of the judicial district where the case is filed, and thus, there is no good cause to take expedited discovery related to possible infringers who are not likely to be residents of the state in which that judicial district is located because those possible infringers cannot be prosecuted in that lawsuit. Nu Image, Inc., v. Does 1–23,322, 799 F. Supp. 2d 34 (D.D.C. 2011). In the Millennium TGA I complaint, the Plaintiff did not allege that any one specific Doe defendant resided in the District of Columbia, let alone that all of the Doe defendants resided here.

Having a judge start off with essentially, “I caught you Judge/Forum shopping,” isn’t a good thing.  The Opinion ends with the Judge telling Plaintiff that they will only get the City and State of the 351 public IP addresses (Comcast subscribers) from the ISP.  Comcast is required to keep the full subscriber information on file for 6 months.  This will allow Plaintiff to seek any subpoenas the right way – in the proper jurisdiction of the defendant.  BUT WAIT!!!!  That would mean Prenda/Plaintiff will have to file new cases in these jurisdictions.  As ALL of these defendants have now been part of TWO previous legal actions for the same issue (1:11-cv-02176 (DC) & 4:11-cv-4501 (TX)) , Federal law (FRCP 41) effectively prevents any new cases.  My post on FRCP 41, “Troll Ball.”  Now you can’t tell me Judge Wilkins didn’t know what he was doing.  It is like giving a kid a suckers that he can’t get the wrapper off of.  😉

Please take a look at the Memorandum Opinion and give me your thoughts.

DieTrollDie 🙂

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 Prenda Law Inc. and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to “To The Point” – Judge Wilkins Kicks Prenda in the Junk, Misc. Action No. 12-mc-00150 (RLW)

  1. Anonymous says:

    I think John Steele needs to accelerate rehab on his ISP Ass Kicking Foot because it’s going to need to kick harder next time.

    Also love that the Judge shoved Prenda’s hand-waiving about not actually accusing/suing the subscribers right up John’s ass. Special attention was given to the non-party status of the subscribers and the important of not placing an undue burden on non-parties.


  2. Raul says:

    Back at the library checking in. My informal impression, to paraphrase Judge Wilkens:

    “You scumbag trolls! What the fuck are you doing with the esteemed legal profession by purposely abusing the subpoena privilege that has been entrusted to you? I am so going to fuck with your business model in my Memorandum Opinion in so many ways that Doe defenders and ISPs will be citing this across the country tomorrow and for very long time to follow.

    P.S. Your bullshit shenanigans will one day get you either indicted, disbarred or sued. I could care less which one happens first but check your radar.”

  3. DieTrollDie says:

    I liked how the judge kills the State civil conspiracy charge,

    “As to the 350 Comcast subscribers who are linked to alleged “co-conspirators” of Doe, the Court also denies the request for identifying information as unduly burdensome. The Fourth Circuit, joining other courts, has recently held that a state law civil conspiracy claim is preempted by the federal Copyright Act.”
    – Nicholas Ranallo spoke of this (preempted by the federal Copyright Act) regarding the BS negligence claim.
    – Continued –
    “(ruling that plaintiffs in BitTorrent copyright infringement action had not, and could not, plausibly plead facts establishing an agreement, a required element of the civil conspiracy claim). If the civil conspiracy claim is invalid, there is no good cause for discovery related to the alleged co-conspirators. As our circuit court has explained, “[t]he federal courts are not free-standing investigative bodies whose coercive power may be brought to bear at will in demanding documents from others. Rather, the discovery devices in federal court stand available to facilitate the resolution of actions cognizable in federal court.”

    DTD 🙂

  4. Paulie says:

    This one made me chuckle as well. It’s Buffy crying about fairness in the above case. Maybe he should check his dates, Judge Kay’s original ruling said comcast had to produce documents within 60 days from 4/17/12. Comcast was just reminding the court that it needed to do something.


    • DieTrollDie says:

      Thanks for that one. LMAO!

      Prenda whining –
      “Plaintiff’s counsel respectfully requests an immediate telephonic hearing on all matters currently pending before the Court so that it may contain the damage caused by Comcast’s ex parte advocacy and have an equal opportunity to present its case.”
      “It bears mentioning that Comcast’s grand strategy in this miscellaneous action is to paint Plaintiff as abusive of the legal process. To be sure, no federal court has ever come close to ruling that a nonparty, like Comcast, has standing to raise joinder and personal jurisdiction defenses on behalf of its subscribers. Yesterday’s developments suggest that Comcast is not well suited to cast the first stone.”
      — Nobody would think of painting Plaintiff (& Prenda) as abusing the courts (heavy sacrasm). Say it isn’t so Duffy.

      You guys are a riot! 😉

      DTD 🙂

  5. Anonymous says:


    It bears mentioning that Comcast’s grand strategy in this miscellaneous action is to paint Plaintiff as abusive of the legal process. To be sure, no federal court has ever come close to ruling that a nonparty, like Comcast, has standing to raise joinder and personal jurisdiction defenses on behalf of its subscribers. Yesterday’s developments suggest that Comcast is not well suited to cast the first stone.

    There’s a first time for everything.

  6. Watching the fall says:

    Oh my gosh! When does this insanity ever end? Isn’t this like someone that is plastered, holding a drink in their hand saying that they NEVER drink?

    I had to reread this three times and then pinch myself and no I’m not dreaming!!

    The only next defense I can imagine for them is to introduce the ‘expert witness’ testimony of Chip the talking teacup!

    In this case, truth is stranger than fiction. I would love to be a fly on the wall to overhear this telephonic discussion.

  7. Watching the fall says:

    Also notice on the disclosure of whether there are related cases, sorry for not using the correct legal term, that Buffy didn’t even sign it per rules of the court. Knowing full well that would have put him at risk for sanctions. I’m sure it was not an oversight!

  8. anonymous says:

    The “Duffy & Buffy Comedy Hour” will hopefully end with both of them sanctioned and disbarred….

    Hey Buffy, isn’t this the case that you commented on a while ago, with some really arrogant remark? I think it was on Jane’s site. You said something like “sitting in DC and meeting with extremely talented jurists, discussing next steps.”

    • Mr. Doe says:

      This is the one where there was a comment about Steele jetsetting around the USA. At least he got some frequent flyer miles out of it.

  9. I hope everyone noticed judge Wilkins’s opinion (footnote 8) on that piece of used toilet paper Steele distributed with ransom letters — the one about futility of the “wireless” defense:

    The purported legal analysis is incomplete and slanted, to say the least – the memo essentially asserts that an Internet subscriber has a duty to know of any infringing activity that passes through her Internet router, and that anything less is “willful blindness” that subjects the subscriber to liability for contributory copyright infringement, a rather dubious proposition.

    Pity that it worked well and hypnotized many hapless Does.

  10. Mr. Yancey says:

    Where the hell are you, John?

  11. sorrybutnotnow says:

    i think John and his fellow shitbag dumbass trolls are scurrying down the sewer grates and manholes, climbing back into the diseased cesspool they came from…..

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