Copyright infringement cases implicate at least 250,000 consumers nationwide

In the past two years, a specific type of copyright infringement case has proliferated across the country, and the firms filing them have become known as “copyright trolls.”

The pejorative has come as these firms troll so-called IP addresses that individual modems are assigned to access the web. They find IP addresses connected with downloads of their clients’ movies and then require Internet service providers to hand over customer data.

The lawsuits offer to settle, typically from $2,500 to $7,500, up front. If defendants are unwilling, lawyers threaten to seek damages of $30,000 to $150,000, the maximum under copyright law.

The first such cases were filed in Oregon over the past two months. Here’s how similar cases have played out in federal courts nationwide:

CaliforniaJudge Bernard Zimmerman of the Northern District of California tossed a suit in 2011 that named 5,011 defendants because, he said, their individual circumstances weren’t similar enough to be joined together. The plaintiff’s lawyers were allowed to proceed against one of the defendants.

“If I allow this matter to proceed with about 5,000 defendants,” Zimmerman wrote, “it will create a logistical nightmare with hundreds if not thousands of defendants filing different motions… each raising unique factual and legal issues that will have to be analyzed one at a time.”

IndianaOn March 26, Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson issued a default judgment in excess of $150,000 against Gerald Glover, who was named in a case and failed to respond. The suit alleged he frequently downloaded protected movies by CP Productions Inc.

OhioJudge James S. Gwin ruled last week that Voltage Pictures, which is the plaintiff in four Oregon cases, improperly linked 197 defendants in four cases. The judge said that the cases must be filed individually, each with its own filing fee.

In his order, Gwin including snippets from other court decisions:

“Courts have been troubled by what amounts to be a new business model employed by production companies ‘misusing the subpoena powers of the court, seeking the identities of the Doe defendants solely to facilitate demand letters and coerce settlement, rather than ultimately serve process and litigate the claims.'”

“It is in this environment where courts must take every caution to ensure that the keys to the doors of discovery are not blithely given to parties with other intentions.”

OregonIn response to the case with 371 “Does” filed by lawyer Carl Crowell, a Salem mother wrote a letter explaining that her adult son had illegally downloaded “Maximum Conviction” from BitTorrent while at her home.

The son “said he used a blocker so no one else could download files from his computer. Enclosed is a money order for $12.99, the cost currently listed for this movie on Amazon.com.

“Please extend my apologies to Voltage Pictures for not paying more attention,” she wrote, “I now consider this issue resolved.”

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2013/04/copyright_infringement_cases_i.html

Advertisements

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