

Judge to copyright troll: your "business model" isn't my problem - grellas
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/judge-to-copyright-troll-your-business-model-isnt-my-problem.ars

======
CWuestefeld
To be clear, it's not that the judge found that the trolls don't have the
right to be trolls. The decision seems designed to eliminate the use of the
courts themselves as a weapon (as opposed to justice being done). It
significantly reduces the amount of money that a defendant must invest to
defend himself.

The money quote from the judge:

"Whether or not this case settles is not my primary concern," wrote the judge
last week. "Although Plaintiff’s business model relies in large part upon
reaching settlement agreements with a minimal investment of time and effort,
the purpose of the courts is to provide a forum for the orderly, just, and
timely resolution of controversies and disputes. Plaintiff’s wishes to the
contrary, the courts are not merely tools for encouraging and exacting
settlements from Defendants cowed by the potential costs of litigation and
liability."

~~~
ascendant
I see that as the judge telling the trolls to stop trolling. Without the
threat of protracted legal costs the trolls have no teeth.

~~~
monochromatic
I agree, and I kind of have a problem with it. Regardless of my thoughts about
this case and others like it, the judge is supposed to be objective; he sure
sounds like he's already biased against the plaintiff.

~~~
chc
It doesn't sound like that to me. He sounds like he's _against_ the plaintiff
on that issue, for sure, but that doesn't mean he lacked objectivity. Being
objective or unbiased means that you aren't influenced by external factors, so
your decision is based only on the relevant facts. It doesn't mean you don't
ultimately take one side or the other.

~~~
monochromatic
The case hasn't been litigated yet. Sure, he's eventually going to take
sides... but this is way premature.

~~~
nitrogen
As I understand it, a judge can make a preliminary decision that a case, or
elements of a case, are without merit, before hearing the complete arguments
of the plaintiff.

~~~
CWuestefeld
Yes. A judge is making ... judgments ... all through the case. Every time that
cliche lawyer jumps up and cries "objection", the judge has to make a
decision, and take a side.

------
nathanb
See also: [http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/03/31/the-
good-...](http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/03/31/the-good-side-of-
a-bad-lawsuit/#)

This one actually came to a decision and the judge ruled against Righthaven,
at least partly because of the odious nature of the copyright trolling
business.

------
jhuckestein
Am I the only one who's more shocked about the content of the article that was
allegedly infringing?

Apparently a man got arrested without bail for ejaculating while getting his
genital piercing patted down ... for "sexual assault" of a federal officer.
Way to go TSA

~~~
fryguy
I'm surprised there aren't more comments on this. The fact that he was
arrested for it that shocked me, as if it's his completely his fault his gun
went off.

~~~
eneveu
I've researched it, and it seems like it was a satirical news website:

<http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/patdown.asp>

<http://www.deadseriousnews.com/?p=603>

------
esoteriq
It's interesting to note that one of the defendant's decent laywer ended up
scaring off the copyright troll. Apparently, the IP lawyer involved was going
to argue RightHaven into the ground, by raising many motions, running up the
copyright troll's legal bills (wrong venue, failure to make a claim, etc.)
It's the penultimate case of turning the tables!

The judge said some nice things about abuse of the courts, but look at the
lawyer for the real victory.

------
thesis
This is running rampant in the adult community right now. Studios suing
thousands of people for uploading to torrents. It's the new revenue model when
your current isn't generating. Subpoena 1000's of IP's and send threatening
letters demanding payment.

Sad.

------
hubb
_This is the way the case ends: not with a bang but a whimper_

solid TS Eliot reference

------
netcan
This is awful.

They're basically playing chicken with legal costs. Usually targets veer
first. This time the trolls did. If neither veers, someone (maybe everyone)
wastes a lots of money.

------
cbare
Props to Judge John Kane. Take that, trolls!

------
ascendant
It always warms my heart when I see people in the legal system get it right. I
think slowly more and more people are entering that profession with a modicum
of understanding of modern technology and how companies have been preying on
the ignorance of the previous generation to bully their way to profitability.

Note that the ignorance of the previous generation is not said as a slight.
I'm sure my children's generation will be rolling their eyes at the things I
say and do 20-30 years from now.

~~~
patrickod
I wonder though how skewed our view of the legal system is? We rarely hear
success stories like there where rulings are made in what is seen in favour of
the greater good. Is that the result of either selective news reporting or
consistent bad judgement alone or a mixture of both?

~~~
jacques_chester
Your view of everything is skewed. As a rule, almost everything works "well".
Crime is rare, legal disputes are usually settled sensibly, politicians work
hard etc.

News is about the _exceptions to the rule_. "Everything Normal" does not make
an interesting headline.

~~~
nitrogen
Yes, averaged across the entire population thinks work reasonably well, but
among critical subsets of the population (like the technologically savvy) the
picture isn't so rosy. For example, does almost everything work well in the
realm of P2P mass lawsuits and college student settlement shakedowns? Are
there millions of college students successfully defending themselves against
shakedown letters not getting any news attention?

