Qui Tam Claims – HDP/Prenda Law Responds – 3:12-cv-01006 (Seth Abrahams)

Hard Drive Productions (HDP)/Prenda Law responded to Seth Abrahams’ supplemental brief on 4 Oct 12.  Case # 3:12-cv-01006.   I wish I had more time to do a full analysis, but I’m still out on assignment. HDP/Prenda’s response doesn’t truly surprise me, but while reading the reply I started to see the writing (and feeling) of Troll John Steele.  Troll Gibbs may have put his name to it, but John Steele was in on the editing at a minimum.   Hard Drive’s response to Abrahams’ supplemental brief

I loved this part of Section 1 of the response and its footnote.

In essence, Plaintiff asserts that he is entitled to Judgment on the Pleadings because, if he does not receive such judgment, he will burden the court with a complicated (or, put more precisely, meritless) qui tam claim. Plaintiff’s words are no less than a threat directed to this Court. 1

 1 Let us be clear from the outset, there is no Qui Tam action here. It is not adequately alleged in Plaintiff’s amended complaint, and there is no possibility that such an action could be brought in this case for reasons described Section III. In other words, as the Court should understand, the Qui Tam claim is entirely bogus, a desperate fabrication by Plaintiff to keep this case alive in wild hopes of attaining attorney’s fees. Its only purpose is its use as phantom leverage to supposedly force the Court’s hand to act at Plaintiff’s will. It has been clear throughout this proceeding that the Court has enough sense not to succumb to Plantiff’s hostage attempts.

I think someone is serious worried the court could rule against them and destroy this house of cards.  Due you think the court is moved by your drama?  You are not the BitTorrent Bull, you are “Ali Baba” – a thief, simply rationalizing his actions.

Now I’m no legal expert, so I will reserve full judgement on the arguments until I’m better able to do more research, but I certainly would not take this response as the truth either.  We have already seen on multiple occasions where Troll Steele claims with righteous fervour that all of us “Pirates” are about to be taught a lesson.  Somehow the lesson never arrives and we are blessed with such quotes as:

If it is not, you will all know the Master Troll is full of ^*(%(&#. If you see your name in lights (or the names of 100 of your pirating buddies), maybe, just maybe, they are really are coming after you thieving criminals. {“The Pirate Hunter” posting on 13 Apr 12, www{.}fightcopyrighttrolls{.}com} – Related post

I was able to read-up a bit on the Qui Tam claims and I don’t buy HDP/Prenda’s view that it is baseless. I think this came as shock to Prenda and they are making a rapid response. Even if the court decides to doesn’t have subject-mater jurisdiction, Abrahams/Yuen will simply refile a formal Qui Tam claim.  Qui Tam will easily allow Abrahams and other parties to file “False Claims” actions on behalf of the Federal government.  Prenda knows that the federal government is not going to take over these Qui Tam cases and it will fall back to the filing parties.  🙂   This is really an ugly situation for all the Trolls and even if the false claims isn’t successful, it will only come after the full exposure of the Trolls technical monitoring set-up are exposed.  Yes people, the Trolls have let the genie out of the bottle and they can’t put it back in.

I did get a good laugh at the statement that the Qui Tam claim is fraudulent. Nothing fraudulent in the facts as it relates to 31 USC § 3729 – False claims, section (a)(1)(G):

(G) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government, or knowingly conceals or knowingly and improperly avoids or decreases an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government,

As Prenda well knows, all that is going to be required to file a case is a showing of prima facie evidence. That will not be hard at all. 🙂 – They are masters at this.  The full details and evidence will come out in litigation.

Well now we just wait to see how the court rules and listen to John Steel sounding like an idiot making replies to the blogs and on Twitter.  I welcome any any all comments here on this issue and especially if you have some knowledge and experience with Qui Tam claims.

DieTrollDie 🙂    “Some ships are designed to sink… others require our attention.”

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 3:12-cv-01006 and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Qui Tam Claims – HDP/Prenda Law Responds – 3:12-cv-01006 (Seth Abrahams)

  1. Subscribe says:

    Subscribe

  2. The Tod says:

    Great post DTD.
    The “Master ‘bater’ Troll” dare not really show his face, as he knows the real world consequnces of the reveal.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Too funny. I love how Buffy’s extensive experience bullying laypeople instead of litigating cases shines through. No legal argument made, no citations of case law, no citations of the law, just a rant with some insults directed at opposing counsel and some flattery of the Court. It’s barely even written in English with grammatical gems like “succumb to Plantiff’s hostage attempts.” Hostage is a noun, not a verb.

    I’m sure glad Prenda found Brett Langdon Gibbs, that guy has done more than anyone IMO to turn the courts against copyright trolling. Gibbs had another decisive defeat this week in CAND, getting one of Prenda’s individual cases dropkicked into the garbage, so I don’t think CAND is the best venue to defend against the Qui Tam claim.

    This is definitely going to be fun to watch, as even getting a Qui Tam case to the point where it turns out to be an invalid claim will likely do so much damage by way of discovery that there will be enough to keep Prenda’s clients in court for the next decade, and considering multiple courts have noted Prenda’s avoidance of filing fees as a justification for severing Does, I don’t think the Qui Tam claim is going to go away that easily. Think about it, if Prenda’s BS antics have gone as far as they have, including crap like the Florida Bill of Discovery cases, why should John expect an even-bogus Qui Tam claim to be any less successful? With the sluggishness of courts to react to clever, but ultimately invalid legal strategies, I predict that even in the best case, that Qui Tam claims are found to be meritless, that there will be such a long war of attrition, and it will cost Prenda’s clients so much money, that it will gum up the works of copyright trolling’s machinery beyond repair.

    It’s quite poetic that the antidote to trolling may turn out to be something similarly aggravating to the trolls themselves. Anyone can bring a Qui Tam action. Like the statutory infringements trolls go after, each violation in a Qui Tam case carries a nasty damage award (actually, more damage per Qui Tam claim than Prenda has charging for settlement…), so like a mass-Doe case lawyers can go after Prenda’s clients with single cases that have tens, hundreds, or thousands of damage claims. Also like copyright trolling, we may see lawyers or entire firms pop up out of the woodwork to pursue these types of claims if there is money to be made.

    Hey John, next time don’t be so obviously aggravated, we can tell from your writing that your sweating bullets and worried about where this is going. You are oozing weakness, and the wolves can smell your fear.

  4. Anonymous says:

    BTW I wonder what happened to Buffy’s claim that this Monday would bring filings on behalf of one of the largest adult content producers in America.

  5. that anonymous coward says:

    And one wonders if this would lead to a nice look at what exactly AF Holdings, AF Films et al actually are and how the payments are being handled.

  6. SMDH says:

    DTD check out the possible STUPID coming out of Anderson in VA. He filed two DOE suits in Eastern and Western Districts telling the judges they don’t know the identity but yet they have account holder “Debtor” initials on their IP list… looks like somebody screwed up.

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