BT Copyright Trolls and Single Doe Cases

SPrayer1Something I have always tried to embrace (sometime begrudgingly) is that the only “constant” in our lives is Change.  In the realm of BitTorrent (BT) Copyright Trolling, change also happens.  Recently we have started to see some changes.  These changes have been an increase in single Doe cases and the filing of law suits that are tied to the Copyright Monetization firm RightsCorp.

Single Doe Cases

These cases are still primarily a Troll Lipscomb (and crew)/Malibu Media/X-Art operation.  We have started to see some single Doe cases from other Troll/Plaintiffs in various numbers and in Troll-friendly jurisdictions.  I apologize if I miss any.

  • Dallas Buyers Club/Voltage Pictures (Troll Carl Crowell) – Oregon – Over 50 cases (Aug 2014 – Apr 2015)
  • Countryman Nevada/Voltage Pictures (Troll Carl Crowell) – Oregon – 5 case (17 Mar 15)
  • Glacier Films/Voltage Pictures (Troll Carl Crowell) – Oregon – 2 case (20 Apr 15)
  • Cobbler Nevada/Voltage Pictures (Troll Carl Crowell) – Oregon – 15 case (May 2015)
  • Manny Film  (Lipscomb & Crew) – FL, OH, MI, NJ, & PA – Over 210 cases (Nov 2014 – Mar 2015)
  • Good Man Productions (Lipscomb & Crew) – DC, CO, FL, MI, NJ, & PA – Over 160 cases (Nov 2014 – Feb 2015)
  • Poplar Oaks (Lipscomb & Crew) – DC, CO, FL, MI, NJ, & PA – Over 50 cases (Nov 2014 – Feb 2015)
  • Rotten Records (Rushie & Young) – MA, NJ, & NY – 6 cases so far (May 2015)

I believe the BT Copyright Troll master-minds saw how the Malibu Media single Doe cases are being run – they appear to be a financial success overall.  Based on this they started to expand their operation to non-porn movies and music.  I assume they take more work overall, but the settlement rates likely go upward.

What factors could lead to an ISP subscriber having a single doe case filed against him/her?

  • The public IP address is seen to be sharing Troll/Plaintiff’s content.  The BT user on the network is seeding the content to others and not just downloading it.
  • The public IP address is monitored/recorded sharing files via BT over a long period (case-by-case).  The monitoring/recording of BT file sharing via the IP address is used to reduce the possibility that a short-term guest or one-time network user could be the offender.  BT usage time-frames can vary, but I would estimate at least a month-long.  I have a copy of a Troll report from April/May 2015, that shows BT monitoring  over a 9 month period.  It is interesting to note that for the monitoring, Plaintiff’s movie was ONLY recorded AFTER 2 months had passed.  During the first two months, the Troll recorded all the BT file sharing (non-Plaintiff content) activity.  The BT monitoring then was kept active for the next 6 months.  This begs the question, “Why would they monitor an IP address for approx. 2 months prior to them recording the downloading/sharing of Plaintiff’s movie?”  It seems that the German BT monitoring companies “may” be sucking up any/all the BT related data they can.  This isn’t a government spy agency, but the activity is still shocking in nature.
  • There are a multitude of “other” files being shared by the public IP address – mainstream movies, television shows, games, programs, computer operating systems, music, etc.  The record of the “Other” (non-Plaintiff) files is used by the Troll to show that the person is a “serial” infringer, as well as to give some insight into the person’s age, likes, hobbies, profession, ethnicity, and family situation.
  • I’m also of the opinion that at least Troll Lipscomb/Malibu Media/X-Art, does some sort of initial filtering of the possible targets to narrow them down to people who have enough money to afford some sort of settlement.  This is likely done by looking at the IP geolocation results and comparing it to the median income for specific areas.  Not a precise method, but it gives them a start.  Once they get the ISP subscriber information, they conduct Internet searches and paid database searches (LexusNexus, etc.) to validate the likely financial situation of the target.  Don’t think a determined group of people could orchestrate such an operation???  I bet the US Government didn’t think this would happen.  ICWatch Article
  • Note: Troll Crowell (OR) is partial to asking the court to allow him to depose the ISP subscriber/Doe.  Such a deposition would be used to first ask if the ISP subscriber was the infringer.  If there is no admission, he will follow-up with questions designed to obtain more information on the network set-up (open or closed), authorized users of the network, number of computers, and details on the people in the residence (age, likes, hobbies, profession, family situation, etc.). 

Is RightsCorp Suing Me?

Simple answer:  NO.  In my previous post (Rotten Records), I highlighted a couple of BT copyright infringement cases in which RightsCorp previously sent the ISP subscribers a multitude of DMCA/Settlement demands, which were ignored.  RightsCorp isn’t bringing the law suits; the Plaintiff (Rotten Records) is the one who is suing the ISP subscriber.  It is unknown if RightsCorp is only providing their BT monitoring data for use in the case OR if they have some other vested interest in the cases.  I wonder if they get any portion of the settlements?  As it is unlikely any of these new RightsCorp supported cases will come to trial, I doubt we will get additional details on their BT monitoring operation soon.

For right now (on average), I’m still of the opinion that if you receive a RightsCorp settlement demand, do not contact them.  These new cases were only filed by Troll Rushie and Young in three jurisdictions (MA, NJ, & NY) and on long-term BT activity – I do expect more to follow in the same jurisdictions.

I’m also of the opinion that a majority of the copyright owners who joined on with RightsCorp do not want to take part in filing law suits.  If they did, they probably wouldn’t have signed on with a company that asks for $20 per infringement – likely a 50/50 split between RightsCorp & the copyright owner.

I would suggest getting a consult by a knowledgeable attorney only if these factors apply.

  1. You live in MA, NJ, or NY
  2. The settlement demand is for Rotten Records content
  3. There have been a large number of RightsCorp settlement demands which were ignored
  4. The IP address has a long history of BT activity

The simplest thing to do once anyone gets such a RightsCorp (or CEG-TEK) notice is to:

  1. Ensure the BT activity on the network stops and doesn’t start back up later
  2. Resecure the WiFi Internet password and don’t freely give it out

RightsCorp’s is basically a “bottom feeder,” – My Opinion.  Over the last couple of years the company has repeatedly lost money and their stock is only worth less than .10 a share.  See current price   As the RightsCorp sections of the Rotten records complaints try to paint a picture of a well-run operation, these new cases may help boost it’s stock price – temporarily.

RightsCorp News Stories – DSLReports   TorrentFreak

DieTrollDie 🙂   “Goodness is something to be chosen. When a man cannot choose he ceases to be a man.”  {Prison Chaplain, A Clockwork Orange (1971)}

ClockworkOrange1

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 Keith Lipscomb and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to BT Copyright Trolls and Single Doe Cases

  1. that anonymous coward says:

    I haven’t done the math, but I saw a staggering number of notices alleged to have been sent to at least 1 of the RightsCorp cases. One does wonder if a notice matters if it is never seen.
    If the notices are being dumped into the ISP provided email, its possible they were never seen so an innocent person might have been unaware of bad things happening.
    The other side of the coin is if they were getting 30 messages a week, perhaps they just tagged them as spam and moved on. I’ve gotten all sorts of spam making all sorts of claims, and there is nothing about a notice from random company name that implies anything bad will happen or that it is a legit notice. If you knew how many emails from “Facebook” I’ve deleted…
    Then if the person actually Googles RightsCorp the media coverage is not kind to them, lending more of a “its a scam” feel to all of it.

    I see this as more of the same crap where cash is being extracted from whoever is willing to pay to avoid the hassle, guilty or innocent. Broken law is broken and it needs reform.

    • SJD says:

      Nothing is new. Look at the FN2 to my first post about the Pelizzo case.

      It is a staggering disconnect between the alleged number of notices sent and the accusation of infringing on a single copyright. I bet all those notices (if they indeed were sent) are identical and list this single download. But the number is designed to impress both judges and public.

      • Andrew Tandrew says:

        I wouldn’t lump this in with Lipscomb’s disingenuous half truths.

        Music is routinely shared in “discographies” which are an artist’s entire catalog in a single torrent, often several hundred tracks. With Rightscorp’s model of licensing monetization entire record labels at a time it would not be difficult or unlikely for a torrent user to draw scores of legitimate flags in a single evening.

      • SJD says:

        …and yet they found nothing better than to pick a single obscure album, which is two decades old and worthless (market wise worthless — I’m not in a position to evaluate its artistic value). Either the other rights holders declined to participate in Rightscorp’s racket or our “IP protectors” are full of shit.

  2. guest says:

    I want to add a caution regarding your advice to stop the bit torrent activity upon receipt of a notice from RightsCorp or CEG-TEK. While this is good advice (and you SHOULD stop), there was a MM lawsuit where the correlation between receipt of the subpoena and halting of bit torrent activity was cited by Lipscomb as evidence that a resident of the house was responsible. Maybe run an open wifi for a few days and gather logs of such before stopping any activity for use as plausible deniability just in case.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      Gathering any supporting logs is always,a good idea. I did that in my case. I would caution you not to leave it open too long, the Plaintiff will claim you were responsible for the BT activity. CATCH-22. My advice is to close the network and stop BT activity on the network ASAP.

      DTD 🙂

  3. Christenson says:

    Guys:
    My, at 0.10 a share, Rightscorp’s entire market capitalisation is well under a million dollars. I think I have finally found a penny stock worth investing in!

  4. Doe says:

    After receiving several notices and the landlord (owner of the internet subscription) freaking out, I paid one settlement for $30 to rights corp and then after they had my info they kept calling me and threatened $150,000 per the 155 infringements. I settled for $1000 as a “first time offender”. I know I should of researched this scam first. Could I possibly cancel my payment to them or am I shit out of luck?

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