3 ms·
Well, there was also their identity theft for legal paperwork, shell companies owned by unborn children, and other false statements to courts about just about a
by lozenge 8y ago
Well, there was also their identity theft for legal paperwork, shell companies owned by unborn children, and other false statements to courts about just about anything.
- thaumasiotes 8y agoAnd none of that represents a legal sanction for copyright trolling. Nobody hates them for their identity theft, shell companies, and lies to the court. Everyone hates them for copyright trolling! And copyright trolling is the only thing they did that the court says is fine! But all the coverage headlines how the court is smacking down "copyright trolls". No it isn't. What is the cause to celebrate?
- gumby 8y ago> Nobody hates them for their identity theft, shell companies, and lies to the court. Actually that's not true. If you followed the case through Techdirt's coverage you'd see plenty of people, and the courts, outraged by all sorts of their behavior including before they extended their activities to trolling with video they owned. Yes, that's right: while they were in legal trouble for their earlier frauds they launched this particular effort. Basically scumbags top to bottom.
- thaumasiotes 8y agoOk, if I stipulate that, I still have my original question. Suppose I'm against copyright trolling and wish it would go away. Does the Prenda case help with that? How?