Upon reading some of the more recent developments in the Jeff Fantalis, Bruce Dunn, v. Malibu Media, LLC., 1:12-cv-00886 (docket), I can across an interesting statement made by attorney Jason Kotzker. In section 5., of Plaintiff’s Motion For Entry Of Protective Order (Doc 60), the following claim is made (I added the emphasis). Motion_ProOrder_00886(CO)
5. Plaintiff has good cause for a protective order because if this information is provided to the public, Plaintiff, its employees and affiliates will be subject to annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden and expense pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). Plaintiff is aware of anti-copyright blogs and websites that follow cases by Plaintiff and disseminate defense strategies and other information. Often these blogs and websites encourage individuals to harass Plaintiff, its employees and affiliates in order to discourage Plaintiff from filing suits against individuals that have infringed its copyrights. Several of Plaintiff’s counsel have received death threats and other harassing letters and emails. Plaintiff has a legitimate fear that if the information of its employees and affiliates is provided and disseminated to the public, Plaintiff, its employees and affiliates will be susceptible to similar threats and experience annoyance, embarrassment and harassment.
Now I have to say reading this section I can only think Troll Kotzker is referring to this site and www.fightcopyrighttrolls.com. I don’t doubt there are other Web sites and blogs that talk about such topics, but these two are the main ones that “follow cases by Plaintiff and disseminate defense strategies and other information.”
To be very clear to Mr. Kotzker, other copyright trolls, and all the Plaintiffs, this site is NOT “anti-copyright” in any sense. I have stated clearly that copyright infringement is wrong and if you are doing it, to stop. The copyright owners have the right to seek redress for the infringement, but their current methods are unethical, legally questionable, and extorting in nature. There are multiple courts across the US that hold this same view.
My Web site is not threatening in any sense. The name of my site refers to the effort to end the copyright trolling business model and not to incite violence. I put this Web site together to help out Doe defendants who were being preyed upon by questionable law firms and pornographers. The information provided has been used to help defendants respond to the cases and to make the copyright troll business model an unacceptable option. I do not encourage the readers to harass or threaten Plaintiffs or the copyright trolls.
If Plaintiff and the Trolls feel harassed by my actions and the information I make available, then they are in the wrong business. I use no illegal or unethical methods, only the freedom of speech to get the word out to the public. I do encouraged people to use all legal methods to defend themselves if they decide to. The only harassing comments I have had on my Web site were directed at myself and others Does and appear to have come from personnel associated with copyright trolls and their supporters.
Making baseless claims are the standard procedure for copyright troll when their operation is being fought. Troll Kotzker and Plaintiff can see Mr. Fantalis is serious and has the full intention of exposing the slimy underbelly of this operation. Troll Kotzker and his master know that if this happens, all future operations will be in serious jeopardy. The other Trolls understand the far-reaching effect it could have on their operations and will try to stop it by either lying or exaggerating any threats.
Thank you Troll Kotzker for allowing me to show everyone “Why We Fight Copyright Trolls.”