TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users

Since 2010 close to 200,000 people in the U.S. have been sued for sharing movies via BitTorrent. For the copyright holders and lawyers these cases are already highly profitable. However, some are testing a new and potentially more effective tactic to pursue alleged copyright infringers which could signal the beginning of a new avalanche of settlements.

Every first year law student knows that copyright related court cases are exclusively a matter of federal law. You can’t bring a copyright suit in state court, period.

However, during the past months more and more BitTorrent-related cases were filed at state courts. And as a complete surprise to us, the judges in question granted the copyright holders the right to subpoena the Internet providers of subscribers they accuse of copyright infringement.

Once the copyright holders obtain the personal details they use this to send out their infamous pay-up-or-else letters, asking the alleged file-sharers to send them a few thousands dollars. On the surface this seems to be identical to what the copyright holders are doing in the federal court cases, aside from the fact that it’s easier and less expensive.

But how can this be? Are these cases being handled properly, have judges forgotten that copyright cases don’t belong in a state court?

In order to find out more about this shortcut we contacted anti-piracy lawyer Marc Randazza whose law firm has filed federal lawsuits against hundreds of BitTorrent users. Randazza told us that the cases filed at state courts are not lawsuits against the alleged sharers, but merely a request to allow the copyright holders to demand that ISPs hand over customer information.

“What is going on here is a complaint for pure discovery — in other words, all the lawyer is asking the court for is for the court to give him the right to figure out who the defendants are. This seems to me to be a proper way to do things,” Randazza told TorrentFreak, admitting that he also has also filed a few cases in state court.

“In effect, it seems like a good thing for the defendants, the plaintiffs, and the courts. Look at it this way: If you do it the federal way, you need to file a case with the proper parties joined. So, separate cases for each hash file and possibly separate cases in separate states — depending on how the local court looks at jurisdiction.”

Although we’re not sure whether simplifying and cheapening the discovery process is a good thing, as it may lead to even more alleged sharers being targeted, Randazza argues that it will lead to cheaper settlement offers.

“If you do it this way, you can at least engage the potential defendants early on. If you do that, your costs are lower and thus your settlement figures can be lower.”

“In my torrent cases, my defendants have to pay pretty high figures to get out of the case — because we put a lot of money and effort into the case. If there were an easier way to get in contact with the torrenters, then they would likely all get off much lighter. Food for thought for potential defendants,” Randazza told us.

But are people really looking for lower settlement offers?

As pointed out earlier, the major problem with the settlement scheme is that people get wrongfully accused, and lower payoffs don’t change that. On the contrary, handling these cases the state court way will only increase the number of potential settlements without a proper review of the ‘evidence’.

In addition, hiring legal representation will make even less sense with lower settlements fees, as that will be more expensive than settling the case outright. It will leave most alleged illicit BitTorrent users with no other option than to settle, even if they are wrongfully accused.

Despite Randazza’s comments, we have the feeling that lawyers who take their cases to state court are not doing this with the interests of their targets in mind. But that shouldn’t surprise anyone of course.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • Hi

    niggar

  • http://twitter.com/marcorandazza marcorandazza

    Good article. However, consider the fact that the bill of pure discovery also allows for an investigation as to whether the defendant is, indeed, a proper defendant or an innocent party.

    Whichever side of the copyright coin you are on (and I work both sides of the coin, representing defendants and plaintiffs), I think that anything that creates an opportunity for less expensive investigation is a good thing for everyone. The more money spent, the more entrenched the parties get into their position.

    My belief is that the lower heat in the conflict, the easier it is for everyone to resolve the conflict.

    • Trololol

      And is your “discovery” fully explored? Are you ABSOLUTELY sure you’re accusing the RIGHT person? Because, if I ever received one of those letters, I’d sue the bastard that sent it. IP spoofing and a myriad of other techniques are pretty solid arguments to toss against someone claiming you “stole” something copyrighted.

      Inb4 don’t feed the troll.

      • Scary Devil Monastery

        Even where no spoofing takes place the University of Washington decidedly proved that the identification of ip adresses carries a 13% error margin. They made their study based on how many ip’s belonging to network printers, decidedly innocent laptops and routers on campus were receiving legal threats by DMCA complaints.

        So even before we introduce wardriving, spoofing or redirected proxying we’re looking at an inescapable 13% of every accused being in all likelyhood perfectly innocent. Something which ought to make any lawyer looking for a class-action suit very happy.

        What I cannot fathom is how the law firms using these methods can be dumb enough to expose themselves to such a giant litigation case in the first place. If there ever was a high-risk legal endeavor this is it.

        • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

          The reason is ‘easy money’ my friend.

          No need for Court hearings, no need for all that tedious fact-finding stuff – just outright threats of “pay up or else we go to Court”.

          Yup, it’s called extortion.

        • Scary Devil Monastery

          @Rob8urcakes

          I can get behind ‘easy money’ as an incentive. But somehow I fail to see how hundreds of allegedly skilled lawyers are able to miss the fact that a single class-action lawsuit presenting empirical evidence (i.e. that around one third to half of their legal extortion letters are bogus and were known to be so before even being sent) would take the lot of them to the cleaners.

          We’re talking instant bankruptcy if any judge like the one who walked in on ACS:Law in the UK walks into the courtroom.

          We’re not talking about low hanging fruit. We’re talking about a pot of gold placed on top of a landmine at the bottom of a shark tank.

          We could assume that they are all either technical morons or true experts at covering their own asses with iron-clad justifications and “good faith” statements.

      • Anonymous

        There should be a class action suit against that John Steele dick bag. It’s amazing he gets away with spamming people and having some pay out of fear or going to trial. The letters stop coming if you ignore ‘em.

    • http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com sophisticatedjanedoe

      The cheapest way is not to jump on the trolling wagon at all – it’s better for everyone: file-sharers don’t suffer from the stress based on bogus threats, innocents don’t have to pay rather than fight because it is cheaper, and lawyers save their reputations, improving the lawyer profession reputation along the way.

    • http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com sophisticatedjanedoe

      My belief is that the lower heat in the conflict, the easier it is for everyone to resolve the conflict.

      You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone — Al Capone.

    • Scary Devil Monastery

      “My belief is that the lower heat in the conflict, the easier it is for everyone to resolve the conflict.”

      The reality remains however, that asking ten thousand people (who may or may not be innocent) to fork over 500$ instead of 5000$ merely means that the extortion scheme of “pay-up-or-else” has a bigger chance of success as going to court will absorb enough time and money to make simply paying up a preferable alternative.

      If you know your only two choices are to pay a steep, albeit affordable fine or go to court which will absorb several times that amount in both effort, time and pure cash…then you will be more motivated to simply pay the extortionist than if the settlement sum was simply unaffordable.

      In my view what is really wrong with this process is that there is no liability involved when a law firm decides to mail legal threats to people against whom their evidence of wrongdoing is so flimsy as to make a drunk eyewitness seem solid. The law needs to take this into account and see to it that a legal threat found to be without basis is punished severely enough so as to discourage any case where evidence is lacking.

      Of course that’ll more or less rule out some 95% of all “accused” fiulesharers hitherto targeted with this method so there’ll be a lot of resistance by law firms using this “revenue model”.

      • Alex Magnus

        Maybe such that the loser pays the legal fees and compensate the other party for the time, effort and damage to their reputation? And when the parties only partly win/partly lose the costs maybe divided at the discretion of the judge?

    • FuzzyDuck

      “My belief is that the lower heat in the conflict, the easier it is for everyone to resolve the conflict.”

      You mean the lower the amount you try to extort, the more likely defendants will pay as going to court is much more expensive.

      There really should be a hefty penalty for false accusation. Maybe a class action for criminal extortion against these lawyers?

    • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes
  • http://twitter.com/marcorandazza marcorandazza

    Close, Sicilian. :)

    • http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com sophisticatedjanedoe

      Extortion skills on the blood level?

  • Jeff Bekcer

    As the war on drugs winds down, The War on Copyright Begins.
    America can’t survive without war. War kills. Therefore, America needs to kill to survive…
    Time for America to either shape up or ship out. 40 to 60 percent of the citizens are totally apathetic toward the government. Watch out USA, you better shape up so you don’t have a revolution on your hands.
    Either way, I’ll have my bag of popcorn watching the world burn.

    • Anonymous

      Either way, I’ll have my bag of popcorn watching the USA burn.

      FTFY

    • B8936052

      Every living things needs to kill to survive, whether directly or indirectly.
      Fact is for someone to win someone else has to lose.
      You don’t have to like it, but that’s the way it is.

  • 9001

    I’m glad I live in Europe. Piracy haven ftw. :D

    • Unreal

      For how long…

      • Anonymous

        For a LONG time, at least.
        In Spain, they recently had a final ruling confirming its 100% legal there.

        • Link?

          Citation needed

        • Link?

          Citation needed

        • Anonymous

          @ Link

          Just go a few pages back on the main page. The article was up I think sometime last week. Maybe the week before tops. But it’s there and easy to find. No link needed, unless you don’t want to just look for yourself.

        • Jwsports

          The problem is they are trying to change the law in Europe, UK is a great example. The problem in the US is that the law says is legal BUT judges keep “misinterpreting” the law. It took us how long to go from no slavery to actually equal rights. It might take us 50 years but “we” will win. It really is just proabition all over again, i dont like something so i am going to ban it. Oh Yeah, just try to sue me, collage student with no “usable income” nothing to loose but time.

  • Hyeah

    “because we put a lot of money and effort into the case”

    ^ Well boohoo, poor you. How ’bout you stop extorting people. Then you’ll spend no money at all! Amazing concept, innit?

    • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

      That. It’s amazing how they are applying Henry Ford to the judicial system. Amazing, worrying and despicable.

      We need an ACS like lawsuit in the US. Fast. Preferably all of the greedy moneysuckers should be put out of comission but if you can keep them at bay as it seems to be happening at the UK then it’s good.

      • Hyeah

        Yeah. It’s particularly despicable how it’s all about them. Not one sentence about the artists/filmmakers/whatever and how it’s about standing up for those. It’s all about their own profits.

  • http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com sophisticatedjanedoe

    Randazza is an interesting person. His blog is not dull, He has many ideas I’m in agreement with. If he would calibrate his moral compass a bit, I would rather admire him. Unfortunately a war is similar to Hollywood – no shades of gray are allowed.

    And by the way I’m absolutely sure that Antonio is innocent. Let him go.

    • R S

      He is a clever man but waiting for him to calibrate his moral compass is a waste of time.

      After he set it to scum-sucking-lawyer-lowlife he superglue’d it in place, then took a sledge hammer and broke anything that could change that calibration. Burnt those parts, buried the ashes, built something over it, and then nuked it with radiation so no one could ever get close to it.

      He has a little baby girl, pity really, I hate to think of what that poor kid has to go through growing up and knowing her pop is such a slimeball.

      • http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com sophisticatedjanedoe

        Yeah, and placing a little girl next to the word “porn” creates a very bad impression…

        http://fightcopyrighttrolls.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/randazza.png

      • http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com sophisticatedjanedoe

        Yeah, and placing a little girl next to the word “porn” creates a very bad impression…

        http://fightcopyrighttrolls.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/randazza.png

      • Anonymous

        Don’t blame the lawyer for this, he’s just doing his job.

        Lawyers defend murderers, wife-beaters and child molesters too. They do what’s in the best interest of their clients and that’s what they are supposed to do.

        • Sophisticatedjanedoe

          I disagree. In many trolling cases lawyers had the idea first and approached their clients with the scheme already designed. I don’t know if this is the situation with Randazza, but even if it is not, how “just defending my client’s interests” excuse is different from “I just followed the orders” defense heard from a soldier involved in massacres?

          Comparison with those who defend criminals is also incorrect. There is nothing immoral in defending a criminal, at least in Christian-influenced societies. Even setting religious aspects of morality aside, defending a criminal is a crucial part of the due process, while trolling cases are sustainable solely because this process is abused.

    • Guest

      I know why. He thinks with his big head unless he encounters porno. His brain then relocates to his pants with the bloodstream. That explains the dilemma: there are 2 different Randazzas: one thinks with the big head, the other – with the small.

      One fights with Righthaven, the other trolls.

  • Zzzz

    This is about money making and the lawyer scum demand what they think people will pay.
    Lower legal costs will not mean lower demands but higher profits.

  • Guest

    Wait … so the settlement amount is dependent on the amount of time and money the attorney has invested in discovery? I always thought that a settlement was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the attorney just acted as a broker. If the attorney’s investment cost is driving the settlement amount to such a degree, wouldn’t that indicate the “cart coming before the horse” so to speak?

    But then again, we all knew that already. Why else would these ambulance-chasers be advertising their services to copyright holders, promising them a limp cut of the take?

    • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

      Excellent point, and well put too, because it highlights the root cause of the extortion.

      It’s NOT the fact that non-commercial filesharing for no profit, no cash and no gain is a heinous crime – it’s all down to legal costs and the threat of having to pay more to defend a frivolous or wrongful allegation of wrongdoing than it is to agree to settle – and that is simply WRONG, UNFAIR and a perversion of justice.

  • Pingback: Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users | Links Daily

  • Pingback: === popurls.com === popular today

  • Blackplan

    How so-called ‘Anti-Piracy’ Lawyers actually find ‘Infringers’: http://tinyurl.com/3nknlal

  • Elisa ? Knockout™

    This will give the opportunity for people being falsely accused to sue the fuck out of these lawyers and entertainment industries etc. Give my personal info out and don’t think i wouldn’t sue them!! Ohh wow that 4 groups of people I could sue, the copyright holder, the entertainment industry, the lawyer and the isp !! Woohoo bring it on!! :)
    Hmm make that 5 the government!!!

  • Gerald

    The firm I work for has dealt with Randazza a time or two, if I could show the inter-office emails discussing him here you’d all have a great laugh. He’s fairly widely thought of as a simple bottom feeder with an ego the size of planet earth.

  • Abuse

    Ernesto I was going to be all sad because you talked to Randazza…
    and then I reread what Randazza said. He wants these to go faster and cheaper so he can just get people to pay him faster, guilty or not.
    He assumes his German IP gathering firm can not be wrong, and that if you own the account your liable if you did it or not.
    It would be nice for a Judge to demand that this tracking software be proven as infallible, and see the glaring holes in it. And to see that several of these IP tracking firms are setting up HoneyPots to track people, can a Judge accept a lawyer allowing his agents making the infringement worse to increase the payday?
    I mean if you read several of the pages of the sworn documents you can see several of these firms openly admit to uploading as well as downloading the alleged infringing material.
    This leads to fun questions, as was in in the IO Group cases, of what happens when they download a mislabeled file? Do they turn themselves in for infringing? Didn’t think so.
    Thanks for covering this…
    John Doe… yes that one….

  • DocGerbil100

    I’ve been too busy following the Norway news to comment properly here (as have many of us, I suspect), but ta for the interesting article. :)

    Some sort-of related news from the BBC – scammers (or possibly just trolls) are using ACS Law’s name to send out fake settlement letters in Greece:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14215510

  • Jack

    This is similar to the racket which ACS:Law were running. All the lawyer is identifying is the account holder who isn’t necessarily the infringer and also there’s no accountability over the IP collection method. The aim is to scare people into paying up, guilty or not.
    ACS:Law’s IP addresses could not be 100% recognised by the ISP who had issued them, in fact only 75% could be recognised & I don’t think that an error rate of 25% is acceptable proof of evidence even before other issues such as wireless and spoofing IPs have been considered.
    Another issue to be aware of is that ACS:Law were keeping 65% of the proceeds and the actual rights holder was getting just 15%. The lawyers are working for themselves here, no interest in guilt or innocence.

  • Pingback: makin257 - Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users

  • Pingback: makin257 - Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    The sooner the USA legal profession gets on top of this the better. If there’s no regulatory body to keep these extortionist fucktards in check then innocent people will indeed be targeted and will suffer penalty for no offence.

    You guys in the USA are out of control, and need to behave properly and fairly for the good of society instead of your fevered and frenzied pursuit of cash.

  • Pingback: Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users | TorrentFreak | NotSoCrazyNews BETA

  • Hello

    Oneswarm and retroshare. Bittorrent is dead.

  • A dude

    I don’t understand why anyone using Bittorent could actually be found guilty of infringement. Can they prove that you shared a full usable copy to someone? Even if your the original seeder you could seed 25% to 4 different people. How could anyone be convicted of copyright infringement for an IP address showing up that is said to be connected with sharing a file, did they download the entire file from this one IP address and check if its a working copy? What if you only download the .txt File from the torrent and share that? This wouldn’t be illegal. I just don’t see how they could come up with enough proof against one Bittorrent user to actually win a case. I guess this is why they use the pay up or else method? They know if anyone didn’t settle they would loose.

  • http://vpnandusenetreviews.com Anonymous

    You need to beat their discovery, plain and simple. You need to disguise yourself on BT, Usenet, P2P, and in general, the entire fcuking internet. If you do this, they will have a bogus IP address to start with. Their complain for discovery will fail, because that IP address will not resolve to you, or your physical address.

    The best way to do this is via a personal VPN service. The VPN will encrypt all your traffic and give you a new dynamic IP while online. The IP the MAFIAA gets will not be linked to you, in fact it will not be linked to anyone.

    The good VPN providers are offering 256bit AES on the data channel (in the tunnel) and 2048 bit on authentication (control channel). They are also giving dynamic IP’s, not static IP’s. Good providers will also not charge you an arm and a leg. Finally, look for providers that don’t ban P2P or file sharing outright, and those that don’t log.

    Two good bets: HideMyAss VPN $11/mo

    iVPN.net $15/mo

    Two other good options are StrongVPN

    and VyprVPN (from Giganews)

    HMA has amazing speeds on their entire network. Plus their software rocks, makes VPN drop dead simple.

    iVPN.net is one of the only providers with a true multihop offering. Your origin goes through an intermediary before finally exiting at an entirely different location.

    StrongVPN is a gigantic VPN provider, but they are US based. Some folks complain that Strong has turned over records in the past, but no proof has ever surfaced of that on the web.

    VyprVPN is offered from Giganews. Giganews fights everything legitimately in court. They have done so for years, with their most recent battle being against Perfect10. They value your privacy.

    Get smart folks, do not use your raw native connection while on BT, Usenet, P2P, or on the web. Do not allow them the luxury of filing some complaint to discovery whom the IP address belongs to. Don’t make their job any easier for them.

    • Guest

      You forgot to tell that many VPN services log IP addresses which can be used later by MAFIAA.

  • Pingback: Mark Dalby :: Security :: Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users

  • Pingback: Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users | RXTX

  • Pingback: Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users | Remove spyware and malware, latest IT security news

  • Pingback: Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users - anacristina's posterous

  • Pingback: Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find A Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users : Test Drive

  • Pingback: Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users | TorrentFreak | Cyber Defense | Computer Security News

  • Pingback: Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find A Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users

  • Pingback: Anti-Piracy Lawyers Find A Cheaper Way To Identify BitTorrent Users | PCE Groups, LLC

  • Pingback: 23,238 Alleged ‘Expendables’ Downloaders Walk Free | TorrentFreak

  • Pingback: P2PTalk » 23,238 Alleged ‘Expendables’ Downloaders Walk Free

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.