Streisand Effect, China Syndrome, & Libel Allegations OR “What A Copyright Troll Probably Shouldn’t Do”

As the 2 April 13, Brett Gibbs/Prenda Law/Alan Cooper/…… hearing fast approaches, I thought I would go over a small part of the voluntarily dismissed libel/defamation case that was filed in Florida, by John Steele on 24 Feb 13.   2013-02-24-MiamiDade Complaint   2013-03-06-SD Fla notice of voluntary dismissal   Thank you Philly Law Blog.  The fact that he did file this case and eventually dismiss it is not my opinion.  The remaining portions of this article are from my analysis – based on available facts and opinions.  If anyone out there disagrees with my analysis or specific parts of it, please by all means post it or email me (doerayme2011@hotmail.com).  Whatever you send me will be fairly evaluated and if a correction is needed, I have no problem doing so.  Even if I decide not to do a correction, I will post your views.  This goes for all of my articles and comments on dietrolldie.com.  The discussion we have here on the issue of Copyright Trolling may get heated at times, but I will not stop the open discussion because someone’s feelings are hurt.  Myself and other posters have been ridiculed and made fun of because we are trying to educate the masses on what the Trolls are doing.  If this is still an issue for you, please fill out the attached form and present it to the nearest Law Enforcement official.    HurtFeelingsForm

In the Florida case, the Plaintiff (John Steele) claimed the following on page 2-3 of the complaint (page separation was removed).

complaint1_20744(FL)

I never thought DieTrollDie was sophisticated.  It is also no more childish then “BitTottent Bull” or other pseudonyms.  As far as if someone needs intense psychological therapy, I’m willing to bet that their issues were there long before any comments were made that hurt someone’s feelings.  The reason we “hide” behind these names is because we know the Trolls will come after us in an attempt to silence us.  Hell, Brett Gibbs (Plaintiff for Ingenuity 13 LLC) made a motion to disqualify Judge Wright when a case didn’t go their way.  Who made that decision?  Smooth move.

tor_ru1I have stated this fear of vindictive prosecution in the various declarations (Torpedoes) I have sent to the courts around the country.  These libel and defamation law suits only go to show that my fears are justified.  Note: Hopefully by the time this is posted, a new Torpedo will have reached its target.  ** On 20 Mar 13, it did.  LINK  ***

Example Of How A Comment Was Taken Out Of Context In The Complaint

On page 29-30 of the complaint (1:13-cv-20744-JAL), Plaintiff claims the following was a libelous statement.

163.  Thank you John Steele. You still haven’t figured out that each time you post, you only help us. Yes a law firm against the Does, that is impressive. Can’t wait to see how you fair against DWT. And John, please stop it with the “Fight Piracy” bit, nobody buys that claim. It is more accurate to say you were thinking of new ways to make money off unsuspecting new Does.  (S. 121)

Now please take a look at the actual full statement (below), as well as the statement from “johndoe” that it was in response to.  Parts of my comments are missing.  I wonder why?  I believe the statement was made by John Steele – I base this on the use of the Mullvad Web proxy and on previous taunting comments made on dietrolldie.com and fightcopyrighttrolls.com.  Yes it is my opinion and I’m willing to listen to alternate views. 

Comment to the following DTD articleCOMCAST Is Starting To Get Fed Up With The Trolls – AF Holdings LLC, v. Does 1-1058, case 1:12-cv-00048-BAH (DC)

————————————————–

johndoe
johndoe@iamtoocheaptopayforthings.com
94.75.220.77 (Mullvad Web Proxy in Sweden, host: m4.mullvad.net)

2012/02/20 at 9:04 pm UTC (4:04 PM EST)

Hello everyone!!

Just sitting here with a nice pale ale, enjoying the various blog posts and thinking of how to better fight piracy. Feeling pretty good about this issue and enjoy exploring the finer points of this litigation with the very distinguished jurists in DC, with whom I have the utmost respect.

I think you guys should just stick to picking on the Hashmis and Stones of the world. After all, not many articles out there about how a certain Miami firm is having any problems with the courts. I guess we will see.

BTW, what firm are you going to call DTD? After all, we have seen your legal mind in all its glory Next time, don’t embarrass yourself, at least ask a law student for help.

“DAMN THE TORPEDOS, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!”

—————————————————————————————————

DTD Response on 4:45PM EST – Please note how certain parts were edited out (I have bolded them) prior to adding it to the Florida law suit (FL Miami-Dade #13-6680 CA 4 | Federal case 1:13-cv-20744-JAL, Document 1-2, Pages 29-30).  Note: John Steele dismissed this case on 6 Mar 13.

Hitting the bottle a bit early on a Monday? I see your ego got you to respond pretty fast. Thank you John Steele. You still haven’t figured out that each time you post, you only help us. Yes a law firm against the Does, that is impressive. Can’t wait to see how you fair against DWT. And John, please stop it with the “Fight Piracy” bit, nobody buys that claim. It is more accurate to say you were thinking of new ways to make money off unsuspecting new Does. Go ahead and make fun of my efforts; it comes across as protesting too much. Claim you firm is untouchable; that will only make the fall that much funnier.

DTD 🙂

——————————————

Please judge for yourself – any libel or defamation?

I find it particularly funny that this part was removed, “Claim you firm is untouchable; that will only make the fall that much funnier.”  Why would this portion be removed from the complaint???   Based on what is happening in California (2:12-cv-08333), this comment hits home.   I also love this comment –

After all, not many articles out there about how a certain Miami firm is having any problems with the courts. I guess we will see.

Yes “we will see.” 2 April 2013.  How about the fact that AF Holdings is now dismissing some of its cases in various courts (Popehat article).   Damage control?  Too little too late in my opinion.  Streisand effect & China Syndrome come to mind.

I will end this with that I believe the various real plaintiffs have a right to seek redress for instances of copyright infringement.  But it needs to be based on fairness and not a business model.  I may not have the answer to fix this problem, but that doesn’t mean I cannot point out the problems with Copyright Trolling.  Disagree with me?  OK, my feelings will not be hurt.

DieTrollDie 🙂

CBC 26 Aug 2011 Public Figure John Steele – Audio Interview.

Forbes Interview of John Steele

Graphic from @JohnHeneryLawyer – Wow!

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 Streisand Effect, China Syndrome, & Libel Allegations OR “What A Copyright Troll Probably Shouldn’t Do”

  1. Mysterious Anonymous says:

    While John has yet to actually suffer the fates of Stone and Hashmi, he has now accumulated far more and higher-profile articles for his own antics, and it appears his flameout will be far more dramatic.

    But I’m sure he thought he was smarter than those guys.

  2. MrMine says:

    I’m on your side but I do want to point this out: Taking a comment out of context is not a bad thing in and of itself.

    What is bad is if taking something out of its context changes its meaning. I kept waiting for you to explain how removing those statements offers a distorted view but you never did.

    I still don’t get it: how does removing the opening and closing sentence affect how the quoted portion is interpreted?

    • SJD says:

      How about this one (omitted part is bolded):

      63. Prenda crooks have been doing a hard work of depriving people a say in the court, the very people they rape (again, in a judicial sense).

      • MrMine says:

        Now that would be a good example of taking something out of context.

        By taking it out, it changes its meaning from rape in a figurative sense to rape in a literal sense.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      OK, what I believe is wrong is taking a comment out of context to help prove a libel claim. By removing the first part of my comment, it hides the fact the comment was made in response, as well as that the poster (i believe was Steele) was drinking. Some people have made comments that Steele possibly has a drinking problem. There are a couple pictures out on the Internet that appear to show Steele under the affect of alcohol. The one where he is holding onto a pole is one. The removal of the last part of my comment goes to show again this is a response comment and that he has voluntarily engaged this blog and its readers in taunts. He is not an innocent victim of some mean spirited people who hide behind names like Bittorentbull.

      DTD 🙂

      • MrMine says:

        A libel case has to do with whether statements of fact are false.

        Here is what they are basing their libel claim on for that quote:

        “You still haven’t figured out that each time you post, you only help us.”

        An arguably factual statement but pretty much impossible to prove false.

        “Yes a law firm against the Does, that is impressive.”

        Opinion.

        “Can’t wait to see how you fair against DWT.”

        Factual but impossible to prove false since you truly can’t wait to see.

        “And John, please stop it with the “Fight Piracy” bit, nobody buys that claim.”

        Factual but impossible to prove false since there are plenty of people that don’t buy that claim..

        “It is more accurate to say you were thinking of new ways to make money off unsuspecting new Does.”

        This is the one and only sentence they have a leg to stand on. A very weak leg but it is a factual statement they will argue is false. It will fail because most reasonable people would interpret it as opinion as to why no one buys the fight piracy claim rather than fact.

        None of the removed statements affect the factual basis of any of those statements so an ‘out of context’ argument doesn’t work for that paragraph.

        Again, I have no love for Prenda but I have had to deal with people who think simply saying ‘out of context!’ is a valid counter argument when it is not always one. Particularly when there is no explanation as to how the context would have changed the meaning.

      • DieTrollDie says:

        None of the removed statements affect the factual basis of any of those statements so an ‘out of context’ argument doesn’t work for that paragraph.

        If you are talking just that paragraph, the removed sentences are not that big of a deal. Taken from a larger view they are very relevant IMO. Those removed sentences give linkage back a larger picture of the situation.

        Thanks for the discussion.

        DTD 🙂

    • that anonymous coward says:

      Without the full context of the post, and the post edited to alter its appearance in a legal document it is trying to mislead the court. Several of the comments attributed to me look horrifying, because you lack the full post. You lack the entire thread leading up to that post. A lawfirm sent a letter threatening to send the police and seize a computer. This can not happen without a trial. Lawyers do not have the power to just sent the police and take property whenever they want. I compared those lawyers to email scammers who for a small fee to help with the taxes will give you a share of millions if you help them get it out of a foriegn country. Both are statements that are false, both want the recipient to do something in response – mainly send money to the sender of the letter.
      The example was posted specifically for family members of a targeted Doe who still believed that lawyers tell the truth, and the Doe MUST have done something wrong. That the legal system would never let someone with shaky evidence make accusations like that without good solid evidence to back up the claims.

      Your honor, in this post he talks about how he likes to steal cars! PUT HIM IN JAIL!
      Your honor, if you read the unedited post he was describing the portions of the video game Grand Theft Auto that he enjoys.

  3. Anonymous says:

    I didn’t realize John is such an expert in psychoanalysis.

    My armchair expert’s opinion, backed up by a few anecdotal success stories, is that if I were to describe John Steele, Prenda Law, and my feelings towards them to friends and family, they would conclude John Steele is the one who needs help.

    And John, don’t think we didn’t notice Alan Cooper’s allegations are never denied in these complaints.

  4. Steele says he is not a public figure. Period. He does not explain that. Why is he not a limited public figure?

    classed as public figures have thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved. In either event, they invite attention and comment. 418 U.S. 323

    or how about this:

    Mr. Bailey complains that his rap is trash
    so he’s seeking compensation in the form of cash.
    Bailey thinks he’s entitled to some monetary gain
    because Eminem used his name in vain.
    The lyrics are stories no one would take as fact
    they’re an exaggeration of a childish act.

    I could not find one accusation worth dignifying with analysis. Even the rape charge – Kissinger did not really rape the world.

    [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/PmvcO8x.jpg[/IMG]

    It’s called hard bargaining. I did not know that trolls get so hurt!

    • that anonymous coward says:

      I thought I was just going to hang out next to the defense of their reputation couldn’t get any worse….

  5. CTVic says:

    I’d noticed that several of the comments were only partial. I was, of course, most interested in my own comments that were cited in the defamation suit, and found that those that were quoted were missing bits & pieces here & there. I didn’t think much of it, until now.
    This degree of widespread “context cutting” in those dozens of comments throughout DTD & FCT blogs must have taken an ENORMOUS amount of time! Steele must have spent countless hours poring over these blogs, reading through comments, highlighting the specific sentences that he wanted to include in this ridiculous defamation suit and cutting out the more insulting pieces of the comments that he didn’t want reproduced as a public document!

    Never in my life have I been so obsessed that I’ve ever gone anywhere near this degree of obsession and compulsion to notarize and document every mean thing said about me on the internet. It’s sick and twisted, if you ask me. Delicious, also! This means that John Steele, ego extraordinaire, reads every last word that’s here to be read. That he details every nasty comment. That he painstakingly documents and analyzes every snyde word that possibly references him.

    This idiotic defamation suit is never going to get anywhere. It flies in the face of the most cherished of American rights. In the end, it only serves as undeniable proof of one thing: that we collectively get under John Steele’s skin, and bug the living piss out of him. I LOVE IT!!

  6. Kelledin says:

    BTW, love the post, but you’re reinventing the wheel. See https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGF4UVJ5UmpZLUhzX0dMNEotSEljTXc6MQ#gid=0 😉

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