6 ms·

Prenda Law and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Appellate Argument

142 points by batguano 11y ago

ericd 11y ago
This is absolutely hilarious, really worth a read.
Natsu 11y ago
I believe this quote from the article sums it up: You want us to send this back for criminal contempt proceedings?" asked Judge Tallman, with the air of a parent asking a toddler whether he really wants to hurl himself down the stairs. "Do you understand that the maximum penalty for contempt is life imprisonment?"
- cbd1984 11y ago
  This Prenda stuff is funnier than the "SCO vs Linux, IBM, and Basic Rationality" nonsense from a while back. It's a Three Stooges bit slowed down to litigation speed: Slapstick with all of the slow deliberation and unswerving inevitability of a glacier bearing down on the supposedly-professional protagonists.
chris_wot 11y ago
Why the hell is this case still going? Put these guys in jail and take away all their money already!
- anseljh 11y ago
  The gears of the judiciary grind slowly, but grind they do. They're grinding these Prenda guys down to their component atoms. That can take a while.
  - chris_wot 11y ago
    And in the meantime, it slows up the system for everyone else. The grinding can go both ways you know.
    - untothebreach 11y ago
      the system is "slow" by design. The ability to appeal means that a potentially wrongly-accused person has a second chance for justice. I'm not saying it's not frustrating; I am definitely frustrated with it at times as well. But this part of the system, at least, is attempting to maximize "justice" (at the very least, to counteract the parts of the system that do not attempt it)
      - anseljh 11y ago
        This is why there are turtles at the base of the columns at the Supreme Court. https://www.flickr.com/photos/morgonmae/2437913438 https://www.flickr.com/photos/morgonmae/2437913438
  - narrator 11y ago
    What's interesting about the civil litigation system is that it is used to dealing with sociopaths and narcissists. After all, they are the ones most likely to wind up in civil litigation. Most people can be deceived by a sociopath's slick manipulations and lies because they naively believe that all people are generally good. Judges in the civil litigation arena are under no such illusions.
- Sacho 11y ago
  If the case would just "stop", they wouldn't go to jail - all Judge Wright imposed were monetary sanctions(he only threatened incarceration). Furthermore, the monetary sanctions aren't even that big(compared to the claims of the money they made). But specifically to answer your question, the reason is that there's an appellate system. And unless you want to argue that the appellate system shouldn't exist, "bad guys" get to use it to argue their case, just like "good guys". Furthermore, as Pietz points out in his oral argument, Judge Wright was exasperated at how much the justice system constrains punishing bad actors abusing the system. This is a core issue, and it's not as easily solved as waving a wand around.
  - venomsnake 11y ago
    Do we have supreme court worthy case on our hands?
    - Someone1234 11y ago
      I highly doubt it. They could try to appeal when they lose this case, but I highly doubt any higher court is going to pick it up as it doesn't really deal with any new matters of law.
- bradleyjg 11y ago
  What I want to know is where are the state bar associations in all of this. I seem to recall several referrals from federal judges, which are generally treated with some dispatch. The fact that they are still being allowed to operate (albeit now using the ADA to extort rather than the copyright law) is a travesty. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150104/12002529596/john-steele-looking-to-join-former-prenda-lawyer-paul-hansmeier-ada-lawsuit-shakedown-business.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150104/12002529596/john-...
spacemanmatt 11y ago
As a fan of wry judicial humor, this excerpt is a MUST-SHARE: Pregerson: And you're a great lawyer. Voelker: I appreciate you saying that, Your Honor. Pregerson: I mean, it says so, right there on your web site.
- nothrabannosir 11y ago
  And right after that: Pregerson: I wonder how many super lawyers there are in this country Voelker: There are a lot of 'em. Pregerson: And a lot of 'em is BS.
Sacho 11y ago
I found the video source fascinating - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObZDipKRH0c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObZDipKRH0c Specifically, the judges' exasperation at Voelker's request (at first) that they remand the case for criminal proceedings. Also Judge Nguyen and Judge Tallman repeatedly attempted to steer Voelker into a course where he might have some merit, but he kept outrageously denying that the case had any legitimacy at all. I don't think he was winning them over much with those arguments. I've really enjoyed watching this channel and I don't think it gets enough views - this is part of the court system's inner workings, laid bare.
- spacemanmatt 11y ago
  Maybe he's setting the stage for a future claim of incompetent counsel.
- aroch 11y ago
  I particularly enjoy the history lesson 30mins in: https://youtu.be/ObZDipKRH0c?t=2000 https://youtu.be/ObZDipKRH0c?t=2000
  - dsjoerg 11y ago
    that might as well be a fraternity hazing
  - dctoedt 11y ago
    The "history lesson" was delivered by Judge Pregerson, who is 91 years old [1] and presided at the argument. Popehat's article notes that Judge Pregerson began the day by announcing that it was the 70th anniversary of the day that he, then a young Marine officer, was severely wounded in the Battle of Okinawa. If he had said he'd been wounded at the Battle of Gettysburg, it would have been only a little more surprising. It's both amazing and wonderful that a WWII veteran is still actively serving on the bench. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Pregerson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Pregerson
    - mcguire 11y ago
rqebmm 11y ago
Can someone fill me in? It looks like there's a ton of backstory to this on popehat, but no good summary.
- DanBC 11y ago
  People who downloaded certain pornographic movies over bit torrent were getting legal letters from the copyrights owners asking for a payment or threatening to take the downloader to court. But the company that "owned" the IP was a shell company set up by the lawyers sending the letters. They created the company and then represented that shell company. It's not certain whether the IP could be transfered in the way Pre da said it had been. In some situations Prenda law just lied about it and forged signatures. One person stood up to the legal threats and it all started going downhill from then on. Multiple judges across the US have expressed disappointment with Prenda and surprise at the shennanigans. Wikipedia has a rather jumbled timeline. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenda_Law http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenda_Law
  - moioci 11y ago
    Additionally, there's good evidence that principals of Prenda Law were the ones that uploaded the movies in question to bittorrent in the first place. These movies were never released through more conventional channels.
mcguire 11y ago
At some point, I'd like a book-length examination of everything that's going on in this case. Preferably by Ken White.

142 points by batguano 11y ago

ericd 11y ago

This is absolutely hilarious, really worth a read.

Natsu 11y ago

I believe this quote from the article sums it up: You want us to send this back for criminal contempt proceedings?" asked Judge Tallman, with the air of a parent asking a toddler whether he really wants to hurl himself down the stairs. "Do you understand that the maximum penalty for contempt is life imprisonment?"

cbd1984 11y ago
This Prenda stuff is funnier than the "SCO vs Linux, IBM, and Basic Rationality" nonsense from a while back. It's a Three Stooges bit slowed down to litigation speed: Slapstick with all of the slow deliberation and unswerving inevitability of a glacier bearing down on the supposedly-professional protagonists.

chris_wot 11y ago

Why the hell is this case still going? Put these guys in jail and take away all their money already!

anseljh 11y ago
The gears of the judiciary grind slowly, but grind they do. They're grinding these Prenda guys down to their component atoms. That can take a while.
- chris_wot 11y ago
  And in the meantime, it slows up the system for everyone else. The grinding can go both ways you know.
  - untothebreach 11y ago
    the system is "slow" by design. The ability to appeal means that a potentially wrongly-accused person has a second chance for justice. I'm not saying it's not frustrating; I am definitely frustrated with it at times as well. But this part of the system, at least, is attempting to maximize "justice" (at the very least, to counteract the parts of the system that do not attempt it)
    - anseljh 11y ago
      This is why there are turtles at the base of the columns at the Supreme Court. https://www.flickr.com/photos/morgonmae/2437913438 https://www.flickr.com/photos/morgonmae/2437913438
- narrator 11y ago
  What's interesting about the civil litigation system is that it is used to dealing with sociopaths and narcissists. After all, they are the ones most likely to wind up in civil litigation. Most people can be deceived by a sociopath's slick manipulations and lies because they naively believe that all people are generally good. Judges in the civil litigation arena are under no such illusions.
Sacho 11y ago
If the case would just "stop", they wouldn't go to jail - all Judge Wright imposed were monetary sanctions(he only threatened incarceration). Furthermore, the monetary sanctions aren't even that big(compared to the claims of the money they made). But specifically to answer your question, the reason is that there's an appellate system. And unless you want to argue that the appellate system shouldn't exist, "bad guys" get to use it to argue their case, just like "good guys". Furthermore, as Pietz points out in his oral argument, Judge Wright was exasperated at how much the justice system constrains punishing bad actors abusing the system. This is a core issue, and it's not as easily solved as waving a wand around.
- venomsnake 11y ago
  Do we have supreme court worthy case on our hands?
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    I highly doubt it. They could try to appeal when they lose this case, but I highly doubt any higher court is going to pick it up as it doesn't really deal with any new matters of law.
bradleyjg 11y ago
What I want to know is where are the state bar associations in all of this. I seem to recall several referrals from federal judges, which are generally treated with some dispatch. The fact that they are still being allowed to operate (albeit now using the ADA to extort rather than the copyright law) is a travesty. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150104/12002529596/john-steele-looking-to-join-former-prenda-lawyer-paul-hansmeier-ada-lawsuit-shakedown-business.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150104/12002529596/john-...

spacemanmatt 11y ago

As a fan of wry judicial humor, this excerpt is a MUST-SHARE: Pregerson: And you're a great lawyer. Voelker: I appreciate you saying that, Your Honor. Pregerson: I mean, it says so, right there on your web site.

nothrabannosir 11y ago
And right after that: Pregerson: I wonder how many super lawyers there are in this country Voelker: There are a lot of 'em. Pregerson: And a lot of 'em is BS.

Sacho 11y ago

I found the video source fascinating - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObZDipKRH0c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObZDipKRH0c Specifically, the judges' exasperation at Voelker's request (at first) that they remand the case for criminal proceedings. Also Judge Nguyen and Judge Tallman repeatedly attempted to steer Voelker into a course where he might have some merit, but he kept outrageously denying that the case had any legitimacy at all. I don't think he was winning them over much with those arguments. I've really enjoyed watching this channel and I don't think it gets enough views - this is part of the court system's inner workings, laid bare.

spacemanmatt 11y ago
Maybe he's setting the stage for a future claim of incompetent counsel.
aroch 11y ago
I particularly enjoy the history lesson 30mins in: https://youtu.be/ObZDipKRH0c?t=2000 https://youtu.be/ObZDipKRH0c?t=2000
- dsjoerg 11y ago
  that might as well be a fraternity hazing
- dctoedt 11y ago
  The "history lesson" was delivered by Judge Pregerson, who is 91 years old [1] and presided at the argument. Popehat's article notes that Judge Pregerson began the day by announcing that it was the 70th anniversary of the day that he, then a young Marine officer, was severely wounded in the Battle of Okinawa. If he had said he'd been wounded at the Battle of Gettysburg, it would have been only a little more surprising. It's both amazing and wonderful that a WWII veteran is still actively serving on the bench. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Pregerson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Pregerson
  - mcguire 11y ago

rqebmm 11y ago

Can someone fill me in? It looks like there's a ton of backstory to this on popehat, but no good summary.

DanBC 11y ago
People who downloaded certain pornographic movies over bit torrent were getting legal letters from the copyrights owners asking for a payment or threatening to take the downloader to court. But the company that "owned" the IP was a shell company set up by the lawyers sending the letters. They created the company and then represented that shell company. It's not certain whether the IP could be transfered in the way Pre da said it had been. In some situations Prenda law just lied about it and forged signatures. One person stood up to the legal threats and it all started going downhill from then on. Multiple judges across the US have expressed disappointment with Prenda and surprise at the shennanigans. Wikipedia has a rather jumbled timeline. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenda_Law http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenda_Law
- moioci 11y ago
  Additionally, there's good evidence that principals of Prenda Law were the ones that uploaded the movies in question to bittorrent in the first place. These movies were never released through more conventional channels.

mcguire 11y ago

At some point, I'd like a book-length examination of everything that's going on in this case. Preferably by Ken White.