decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Prenda lawyer downplays devastating order, promises appeal | 174 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
EU has charged Google with antitrust violations for patent attack
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 06 2013 @ 08:14 PM EDT
An interesting turn of events. If this goes to trial I hope Groklaw covers it.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Bill Gates: iPad users are frustrated
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 03:31 AM EDT
I must have misunderstood the question, "How big of a problem is China?" 10'56"

Gates had been talking about the big names in the business, software in depth, services in depth, then when asked about China he goes off on a rant about bashing down the piracy numbers. Which I take to mean it hasn't entered his head that China could come out with products, hardware and software, that will pull the rug out from under some of those big companies, his included.

As for the iPad users not being able to type, it's obvious he's jealous the iPad box is so light because Apple don't ship a keyboard with every one, and their margin goes up by selling them as separates.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Prenda hammered: Judge sends porn-trolling lawyers to criminal investigators
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 09:12 AM EDT
A harsh fact-finding

At a hearing last month, the lawyers behind Prenda finally showed in court up as
Wright ordered them to. But when they were confronted with Wright's questions,
they clammed up and pled the Fifth Amendment. They wouldn't answer simple
questions, like who owned their shell companies and where the settlement money
(rumored to be in the millions) was going.

"Well, if you say answering those kinds of questions would incriminate him,
I'll take you at your word," Wright said to Hansmeier's lawyer at the
time.

The three lawyers Wright refers to as the "Principals"—lawyers Paul
Hansmeier, John Steele, and Paul Duffy—refused to describe their own behavior in
court. Now, just as he said he would, Wright has assumed the worst.

In today's order, Wright finds that:

Prenda shell companies like AF Holdings and Ingenuity 13 were created
"for the sole purpose of litigating copyright-infringement lawsuits."
They have no assets other than the pornographic movies they sue over. And
despite their legal trickery using offshore vehicles, "the Principals
[Steele, Hansmeier, and Paul Duffy] are the de facto owners and officers."
Their strategy of identifying IP numbers, issuing subpoenas to ISPs, and
sending demand letters offering to settle for about $4,000 "was highly
successful because of statutory-copyright damages, the pornographic subject
matter, and the high cost of litigation." Steele, Hansmeier and Duffy got
"proceeds of millions of dollars due to the numerosity of Defendants."
And Wright added, "No taxes have been paid on this income."
The Prenda lawyers engaged in "vexatious litigation designed to coerce
settlement." They showed little desire to actually fight when a
"determined defendant" showed up. "Instead of litigating, they
dismiss the case," notes Wright. "When pressed for discovery, the
Principals offer only disinformation—even to the Court."
Local California lawyer Brett Gibbs sued on behalf of Prenda and then tried
to back away from their scheme to testify against them, but he's still in
trouble. Wright states, "Though Gibbs is culpable for his own conduct
before the Court, the Principals directed his actions. In some instances, Gibbs
operated within narrow parameters given to him by the Principals, whom he called
'senior attorneys.'"
Finally, the allegations of identity theft look legitimate. Steele,
Hansmeier, and Duffy conspired to fraudulently sign the copyright assignment for
the adult movie Popular Demand using Alan Cooper's signature, pretending he was
an officer of AF Holdings.
Wright concludes: "Plaintiffs’ representations about their operations,
relationships, and financial interests have varied from feigned ignorance to
misstatements to outright lies. But this deception was calculated so that the
Court would grant Plaintiffs’ early-discovery requests, thereby allowing
Plaintiffs to identify defendants and exact settlement proceeds from them. With
these granted requests, Plaintiffs borrow the authority of the Court to pressure
settlement."

Sanctions range from merely expensive to criminal

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/05/prenda-hammered-judge-sends-porn-trol
ling-lawyers-to-criminal-investigators/

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Software Patents: The Engineer vs. Designer Perspective
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 10:07 AM EDT
Something that jumps out at me here is this line:
"to think of things as not being innovations is mind blowing."

You don't patent an "innovation" you patent an *invention*

"Innovation" is a word that has entered the language recently to mean:
"I can't call this an invention with a straight face, but I want people to
think I called this an invention, so I'll use a made-up word that sounds like
invention instead."

And then there was this bit:
"If it’s part old stuff, even reconstituted in a way that does something
newly magical"

Does this guy, who's calls himself an expert, believe that anything computers do
is magical?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Megaupload Launches Frontal Attack
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 03:51 PM EDT
Newspick

Radio New Zealand interview with Robert Amsterdam.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Analyzing 450 million lines of software code
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 03:57 PM EDT

Article link.

Makes one wonder how a scan of Microsoft code would compare.

Of course, with my biases, I expect MS code to ring in as much lower quality.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Google's Schmidt calls for 'DELETE from INTERWEBS' button
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 05:44 PM EDT
Was he thinking through the implications of this other Newspick?
"You may send the court order. However, because of you, we are relocating to Germany so it must be from a German court. That was your choice.
...
Lawyers and police told Go Public there is little recourse for victims in Clayworth's shoes, because his court orders are from Malaysia.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Google Glass Gets Smeared: 11 Improvement Ideas - Precursor
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 12:56 AM EDT

"Google Glass Gets Smeared: 11 Improvement Ideas"  (InformationWeek.com article, 7 May 2013)

The thing that is missing from the above article and others is a reference to a television precursor. Over forty (40) years ago there was a pilot called Probe (IMDB entry) and a series called Search (IMDB entry). The operatives wore a sensor disk that could be mounted on a ring, tie bar/tack, or a necklace. The sensors included audio, video (visible and IR), and RF. The return channel was audio only to an implant behind one ear. Head colds could really gum up the works.

The above precursor leads me to believe that the Google Glass ® product isn't a giant leap into the unknown. Besides the usual "Young Turks" going for the latest gadget there will older people who will remember the Search series and make the connection. Think what a police or FBI crime scene team could do with a data van, a Wi-Fi relay, and Google Glass ®'s that have LIDAR (Wikipedia article) capabilities.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

EFF: Prenda Law Is The Tip of the Iceberg
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 09:41 AM EDT
Link EFF

The U.S. Congress is beginning to take a serious look at copyright law, with the first hearing scheduled for May 16th. Lawmakers must keep in mind how privileges given to copyright owners can be used as tools of abuse as Prenda Law has done. And anyone who comes to Congress asking for expanded rights and powers for rightsholders should be prepared to explain how the public will be protected against the abuse of those rights. Let's celebrate today. But let's keep our eyes on the ball.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Prenda lawyer downplays devastating order, promises appeal
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 09:41 AM EDT
Steele attacked US District Judge Otis Wright's order publicly, telling adult-industry publication XBIZ (NSFW) that he intends to appeal it.

"Obviously we don't agree on the ruling," Steele said. "Judge Wright based his order on an eight-minute hearing where there was no testimony, no evidence introduced. Clearly Judge Wright does not like this type of litigation and he's no fan of intellectual property law." - Joe Mullin, ars technica
The hearing was only 8 minutes long because everyone associated with Prenda Law refused to say anything, citing their fifth amendment rights. So the only facts in evidence that the judge had to go on were the facts presented by the defendant, and so his only choice was to believe those facts.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Accidentally Released - etc
Authored by: FrankH on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 10:10 AM EDT
The "Accidentally Released..." story about Goldman Sachs and naked
short selling isn't exactly news. It is dated May 15th. Comments go back a year.

---
All right now, baby it's all right now.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )