30 Sep 13, Prenda Hearing – No Lutz / Mother-In-Law / Bad Acting – 0:12-cv-01445, AF Holdings LLC v. Doe

8 Oct 13 Update – Where’s Waldo? Mark Lutz?

Team Prenda responded to the Alan Cooper testimony that John Steele’s mother-in-law was the source of information that his name was being used with out his permission.  Here is a Techdirt article on the wonderful piece of fiction they submitted to the court – Team Prenda Tries To Flip The Story Of John Steele’s Mother-in-Law To Make Alan Cooper Look Bad

Funny how the documents FAIL to address the central issue of Mark Lutz, AF Holding LLC Officer, did not testifying that Alan Cooper’s signature (actually it was Mark Lutz who signed – according to what John Steele claimed to have heard) was valid.  They even then state that the Cooper/Lutz signature is not needed to accept transfer rights of the copyright.  This judge must be banging his head on the table wondering what he did to deserve this.  WHERE IS MARK LUTZ???

On another related note, please see the following Russel/Sweet Reply In Support For Sanctions in case 1:13-cv-04341, Prenda Law Inc., v. Paul Goodfred, Alan Cooper, and John Does 1-10 (NDIL).   Archive Docket   ReplySuppSanctions_04341(IL)   RSS_Ex_A_04341(IL)

DTD 🙂

——————————————————————————

Well what can I say about the Prenda hearing in MN, yesterday (30 Sep 13)?  Archive Docket   0:12-cv-01445, AF Holdings LLC v. Doe   I’m still reading the various reports from the hearing and I’m sorry to say I couldn’t be there to observe.  I probably would have been asked to leave because of my laughter.  Thank you all who attended and reported about it.  I hope someone requests a transcript of the hearing and makes it public.  From what I read, Prenda made many contradictions to previous statements, testimony, and documents.  Such a blunder is bound to be used in other ongoing cases.

Links to some of the stories

Techdirt1   Techdirt2   Torrentfreak   Copyright Librarian

Of course one of the funniest parts of this Prenda side-show circus is it appears that John Steele’s Mother-in-Law started all this Alan Cooper mess for them.  From the Torrent Freak article:

Cooper was alerted by a text from a “Kim Eckenrud” (spelling unknown) who sent a copy of a document with Coopers signature on with the advice to get an attorney. Kim is John Steele’s mother in law. Steele later tried to dismiss this, saying she’s religious and a frequent poster on anti-troll sites, who disapproves of his porn work. Or it could also be the work of Anonymous Pirates on the Internet, resorting back to the claims of internet bullying that have been echoed in other Prenda/AF Holdings cases.

Now the anti-troll sites (did Steele say that, “Anti-Troll Sites”??) mentioned were DieTrollDie.com and Fightcopyrighttrolls.com.  If Mrs. Eckenrund Eckenrode is a poster to our sites, it is news to me.  If so, welcome and please share your thoughts.  The same goes for any other person, attorney, etc.

Does anyone know anything about the claim from Steele that he was threatened via a post on some site.  From the Torrent Freak article:

To underscore this, he had earlier recounted a tale where someone posted a picture of his house and child, with the message “Best caliber to kill Steele’s family? When and Where?“. That was also why he stopped practicing law, because of threats from pirate blogs, he claimed, choking up and having to stop for water. He did seem to be silent about the police’s reaction to it though.

Myself and others do not condone such activity (if it actually happened – I have my doubts).  Anything Prenda says or does is suspect in my book.  I do not wish any harm to come to the Prenda clan.  Saying that, I put my faith in the legal system that the Prenda clan and all that took part in its activities get what is rightly and legally deserved.  You have brought this on yourself.

All Points Bulletin – Mark Lutz.  Mark, if you are still out there, it is time to make a deal and save your butt.  You are the next Prenda fall guy IMO.  Whatever information John Steele has on you is nothing compared to the information you have on him and the Prenda clan.  Think………

OK, now it is time for some Mother-in-Law jokes.

DieTrollDie 🙂

JS_MIL1MIL_Sale1

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 Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to 30 Sep 13, Prenda Hearing – No Lutz / Mother-In-Law / Bad Acting – 0:12-cv-01445, AF Holdings LLC v. Doe

  1. DieTrollDie says:

    Paul Hansmeier tries to tell the court that there must be a “good faith” reason why Mark Lutz failed to appear at the hearing. https://dietrolldie.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/ph_decl_lutz_doc52_01445mn.pdf Still no good reason was given to the court. Sad.

    DTD 🙂

  2. Jack says:

    It’s cute how he points out all the times Mark Lutz actually bothered to show up while conveniently ignoring every recent court appearance he was “prevented from making.” It’s like being tried for murder and having your defense attorney’s strategy be to point out the fact you were able to talk to some people the other day without killing them, while sweeping the other dead bodies under the rug…

  3. Guest says:

    Ah, Steele. Ever the source of entertainment. “Your Honor, I’m a big pirate slayer making hundreds of thousands a month suing filthy pirates. But a few of them started to be mean to me and my mother-in-law doesn’t like me dealing with porn companies so I’m no longer practicing. Don’t let the above disconnects and other contradicting information dissuade you from my thinly veiled threatening argument that Alan Cooper is a douche, though.”

  4. DieTrollDie says:

    Arstechnica article – http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/10/prendas-john-steele-accused-of-identity-theft-by-his-own-mother-in-law/
    ———————————————————————————————–

    Cooper was then examined by his own lawyer, who promptly admitted the Eckenrode text message into evidence. The exact message wasn’t clear, but it told Cooper that Steele was using his signature, “works with porn companies based in Nevis,” and sues downloaders for profit. It recommended an attorney, who ultimately led Cooper to Godfried.

    At this point, Steele exhaled loudly.

    Steele went back to the stand to explain the texts. He testified that his mother-in-law had read about his work and Prenda Law on anti-troll blogs like DieTrollDie. He said that she is “very religious” and concerned about his involvement in the adult industry. Even though he didn’t own Prenda, Steele’s mother-in-law had become concerned reading “random guesswork from Internet pirates,” he said. He didn’t know whether the text message to Cooper came from her, but the tone was consistent with “anonymous pirates on the Internet.”

  5. David says:

    I think it rather likely that Lutz was kept out of the loop by Steele/Hansmeier. The story about him turning in early may well be fabricated, and it sounds like nonsense that they would ask friends about him early in the morning. He’s the designated fall guy, and not appearing is perfect for that.

    Now the really excellingly bad move from Steele this time round was to start discussing his mother in law’s character and motivation. The only way his card house of lies would have been able to stand up here if he flatly called out the story around her as fabricated: the whole point of the various character assassinations was to suggest low-down motives for Cooper et al to be telling untruths.

    Steele has lost sight of the target by reverting to character assassination in order to suggest low-down motives for them to be telling the truth.

    I have my doubts the judge is going to shed a tear and say “dismissed, you poor boy”.

  6. Anon E. Mous says:

    I think Steele’s ego has caught him in a trap here. When Hansmeier got Cooper on the stand and asked him how he got the information that his signature was being used and Cooper, didn’t wan’t to mention Eckenrode’s name and Hansmeier wanted an answer and the Judge made Cooper say how he got the information then Godfried got the text message entered into the case as an exhibit.

    Now remember Steele went and got back on the stand and told the tale of how Eckenrode was religious and was on the copyright troll blogs cause she didn’t like Steele’s work with Porn companies etc. I would have too believe that Steele oversized ego may have just opened a huge can of worms.

    First off there is nothing stopping Godfried from bringing Mrs Eckenrode to court to tell her side of the story as to why she warned Cooper about the use of his name and signature. Godfried could also have her rebut the testimony of Steele and his reasoning as to why she would message Cooper and warn him of the goings on with the use of Cooper’s name.

    Now I said when Steele filed a bar complaint against Gibbs that he was making a major mistake and that Gibbs more than likely had Telephone and Mobile bills with Steele / Hansmeier / Duffys number on them for calls made and received as well as emails, and courier bills and turns out he did.

    We all know Duffy didn’t do well in court that day. If Ekenrode knows a lot of the intimate details like Gibbs did then John may have made a new and powerful enemy. Surely she would have heard some of the goings on with all of these porn lawsuits and how these companies and entities were set up and how much they were making from their litigation in these cases.

    Here is the thing, Steele loves to toot his own horn, and we all know John’s ego and own mouth have gotten him in trouble with contradicting things he has said. Now he has more or less slighted Eckenrode and someone who would have knowledge of how this was done from John and John’s ex wife and her daughter, cause as we all know mother and daughter talk…a lot… about just everything.

    Steele comments are in the court record so are Coopers and the text message is now part of the case. There is no reason Godfried couldn’t put Mrs Ekenrode on the stand and get her to affirm that she id in deed send the text to Cooper to warn him about the going on with his name and signature and refute Steele’s comments about her.

    That being said this would also allow Godfried to ask her about her knowledge of what was going on and why she wanted to warn Cooper of this. I think old John just opened up a huge can of worms and created a new and powerful enemy

  7. David says:

    Actually, Steele had Lutz’ boarding pass? When the ticket would have had to be paid by AF Holding aka Lutz himself for accounting reasons? This makes it sound like Lutz had the perfect excuse not to show up, being buried in a plastic bag. When is the last time anybody has seen him?

  8. DieTrollDie says:

    More crazy Prenda actions again today. Here is the archive docket – http://ia601203.us.archive.org/34/items/gov.uscourts.mnd.126519/gov.uscourts.mnd.126519.docket.html

    The new documents are #53 – 56. The declaration of Kimberly Eckenrode (John Steele’s Mother-in-Law is worth a read. http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.mnd.126519/gov.uscourts.mnd.126519.56.1.pdf

    You can’t make this stuff up.

    DTD 🙂

  9. Anon E. Mous says:

    LOL.. so Prenda is doing a little damage control after the hearing. Funny how they managed to get Mrs Eckenrode to sign this so quickly, has anyone checked to see if this is actually her signature? I l like the irony that Hansmeier is AF Holdings lawyer, wasn’t he claiming he knew nothing about any of this and had nothing to do with AF Holding but is one again appearing as legal counsel on an AF Holdings with the last one being when he appeared for the deposition with Pietz and Ranallo. For a guy who knows nothing about AF Holdings, Hansmeier sure seem be involved a lot. Or maybe they didn’t wasn’t Duffy to do any more courtroom appearance after his disastrous cross of Gibbs.

  10. DonaldB says:

    OK, this turned into an interesting and diverting sideshow.

    But how does it actually help Prenda? It’s still not Cooper’s signature. No one has yet claimed to have signed it on behalf of Cooper.

    There is only the suggestion that Lutz signed the document on behalf of Cooper. But that story has major problems. Such a signature is probably not legally valid without an “on behalf of” note.. An “on behalf of” signing should have an explicit authorization, probably in writing. Lutz has never actually made a claim that he signed for Cooper. And such a declaration would now be untimely — it should have been made long ago. It definitely should have been made before the hearing. Lutz skipped the hearing, is still missing.and no excuse has been filed. Making such a statement now should be far too late, even if a shred of credibility could be found.

    So, again, how can this sideshow help Prenda? It might cast doubt on if Cooper really was oblivious to the Prenda porn shakedown. But that’s wasn’t the point of the hearing.

    • Jack says:

      I like how everyone trying to discredit Cooper won’t do it directly – they always do it through hearsay. Instead of Lutz testifying that he spoke to Cooper authorizing the signature, Steele testified that he heard Cooper talking to Lutz and assumed that meant the signature was authorized. When Eckenrode is attempting to say Cooper knew about the signatures pre-11/15, she states that her husband spoke to Cooper about this – not her.

      If this had any basis in truth, instead of Steele and Kim Eckenrode testifying about hearsay, Lutz and Kim’s husband should be the ones testifying… I guess the problem there is that if they did testify they would be lying, and that would be perjury…

      • DieTrollDie says:

        Well said.

        DTD 🙂

      • DonaldB says:

        They are trying to discredit Cooper with very carefully constructed and limited statements. They are kind of declarations that get assertions on the record, without subjecting the person to a deposition or cross-examination.

        But even so, it’s all good. Everything that get put into a written statement further constrains what Prenda can claim in the future. There are an infinite number of things Kim could have said. Now she can’t say anything that contradicts her statement, nor *anything more relevant*. And every day that goes by without Lutz making a statement reduces the credibility of what he eventually says.

  11. DonaldB says:

    It appears that we still don’t have a statement from Lutz. Or even a statement on why he was absent from the hearing.

    Didn’t the judge request such a statement? Perhaps he is still waiting — “I’m sure that there will be a good reason” suggests that something will be forthcoming.

    The court has ruled that it has an inherent interest in investigating a fraudulent document placed before it. It’s only a short step to questioning the putative corporation behind the document, when it appears to be part of the now-established fraud.

    At this point the court can’t establish that Lutz actually has anything to do with AF Holdings, or even that AF Holdings exists. The name ‘Lutz’ has come up many times, but he hasn’t shown to testify. His name is not on any corporate documents and there are no pay records. For AF Holdings we have only a single page document, putatively from Nevis, that such a company has been established. Beyond the statements of Steele and Hansmeier, it’s actual role hasn’t been confirmed. We have no accounting records, no internal communication.

    The court’s next step may be to ask for the retention agreement between AF Holdings and Steele/Hansmeier/Prenda, along with financial records. It would be highly unusual, but this isn’t a typical situation. Attorney-client confidentiality doesn’t exist if there isn’t a client.

  12. DieTrollDie says:

    I assume Prenda thinks it is the lesser of two evils for Mark Lutz to disappear and then they can claim they had no idea he was going to do this. Paul Hansmeier’s statement saying this just “smells bad.” It is a smell that nobody (including the judge here) is going to be able to ignore (or beleive IMO) – The best they have is John Steele claiming he heard a one-sided telephone conversation between Cooper and Lutz. Cooper denies this and Lutz cannot be located to say otherwise. We can see where this is going. I believe they are hoping the judge will only marginally punish them and they can move on. I too hope the judge decides to get to the bottom of this.

    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