|
|
|
| Authored by: maroberts on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 09:38 AM EDT |
| here
Its one of the most
awesome and amusing judgements ever! (Unless you're a Prenda lawyer) [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 10:31 AM EDT |
There's battlestations, redshirts, Spock quotes and whatnot throughout the
order....have fun!
(Christenson)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 07 2013 @ 01:09 PM EDT |
Well, almost. so far.
As long as Prenda et. al. can keep things focused on the litigation THEY WIN!
Remember its all about the money; repeat: THE MONEY!
The money is in the letters, not the litigation.
As long as Prenda's boiler room can keep sending letters and raking in
settlements, Prenda is winning. From reporting on other sites, it appears that
they are still collecting IP addresses and mailing addresses (mostly in state
courts?) and thus can still crank out the letters. Nothing in these sanctions
would appear to impede that on-going boiler operation.
From what I can see, the absolutely most dangerous question that Prenda faces is
one that has been lost in all the litigation noise.
To wit: >Who< uploaded the files that Prenda is demanding settlements
for?
Prenda can lose litigation, lose law licences, pay trivial fines etc, and still
be highly profitable, because the letters, the precious letters, would still be
technically legal (maybe).
BUT if any evidence surfaces that Prenda uploaded the files, then all of those
letters become potential felony counts of fraud.
You can't upload a file, and then demand money from a downloader under color of
copyright theft. (Because the downloader didn't steal anything; you GAVE it
away).
The key is going to be what the US Attorney/FBI does with that key question: Who
put the files up to begin with?
Yes its a fun decision, effective as far as it goes, but it only starts the real
investigation.
PS As for the IRS: The audit may be like having a tooth pulled without gas, but
I doubt there is any significant undeclared tax liability. Maybe, but not
likely. The money may have been distributed/reported as personal income, or
sitting as retained earnings, or in an 'escrow' account. But it gets tough to
prove tax evasion in that situation.
On the other hand, given these peoples' propensity for lying, and all those
Federal Agents about to decend upon them, we can always just sit back and watch.
Remember: Who put the files up? Woof Woof
IANAL, IDEPOOTV
JG [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
