Illegal Downloading

[fdfschan]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

RE: 1:11-cv-00057-CKK

I recently received a letter from my ISP (Comcast) stating that they received a subpoena from a court in the District of Columbia for my name and information regarding a lawsuit for illegally downloading a movie.

In the letter they said that I have until the end of April to write/fax them that I have quashed the subpoena.

I have many questions. First, You may have read in the news, their first case (exactly the same thing) was essentially dismissed with the judge stating that they must have jurisdiction over the defendants. Is it better in my case to move to quash or dismiss since there is no jurisdiction over me?

Second, What are the chances that Comcast is simply going to hand them the information anyway unless I lawyer up?

Third, how long should I wait until making a movement?

Thank all of you in advance for your time and answers.

 

[Silverplum]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

RE: 1:11-cv-00057-CKK

I recently received a letter from my ISP (Comcast) stating that they received a subpoena from a court in the District of Columbia for my name and information regarding a lawsuit for illegally downloading a movie.

In the letter they said that I have until the end of April to write/fax them that I have quashed the subpoena.

I have many questions. First, You may have read in the news, their first case (exactly the same thing) was essentially dismissed with the judge stating that they must have jurisdiction over the defendants. Is it better in my case to move to quash or dismiss since there is no jurisdiction over me?

Second, What are the chances that Comcast is simply going to hand them the information anyway unless I lawyer up?

Third, how long should I wait until making a movement?

Thank all of you in advance for your time and answers.

Why do you believe there is no jurisdiction over you?

 

[FlyingRon]

Why do you believe there is no jurisdiction over you?

If he was a defendant, he might have an issue with jurisdiction. Comcast is however headquartered in Philadelphia and they are the target of the subpoena. I suspect they have enough presence in the 4th district to make that a valid subpoena.

 

[fdfschan]

FlyingRon: You are right, thank you. The subpoena is not for me, but Comcast.

Silverplum: I was under the impression that the company would have to file in my state in order to have a successful suit against me.

 

[FlyingRon]

FlyingRon: You are right, thank you. The subpoena is not for me, but Comcast.

Silverplum: I was under the impression that the company would have to file in my state in order to have a successful suit against me.

It's a federal matter. They'll file in whatever federal court could have jurisdiction and would be most amenable in disposition to them.

 

[Silverplum]

It's a federal matter. They'll file in whatever federal court could have jurisdiction and would be most amenable in disposition to them.

That's what I was implying in my previous post.

 

[musicman654321]

Hi,

The biggest problem I see with federal courts is that you cannot go down to your closest one & see filings in other courthouses across the country... they are still back in the stone age.

I did see some Does being dismissed ... I wonder why?

You would have to file a motion to quash / motion to dismiss

I would get the court file regarding to several Does who were successful in having them dismissed..motions, objections, order ..

Maybe call the clerk & see if they'll fax you over the pleadings & order .. you might get lucky.

I dont see a fed court making a ruling by the end of April .. 1 month to get a motion through? Sounds impossible.

 

[fdfschan]

I'm guessing that those two Does just settled, or I guess it's possible that they named a couple of IPs that are people they don't want showing as defendants.

I'm wondering what sets this case apart from their previous case that was thrown out? I mean, why would they file again immediately with no success the first time?

EDIT: Just got the last document. It lists IP 24.34.195.23. An IP WHOIS says it's a Comcast IP in Amherst, MA. No further info.

 

[musicman654321]

I'm guessing that those two Does just settled, or I guess it's possible that they named a couple of IPs that are people they don't want showing as defendants.

I'm wondering what sets this case apart from their previous case that was thrown out? I mean, why would they file again immediately with no success the first time?

EDIT: Just got the last document. It lists IP 24.34.195.23. An IP WHOIS says it's a Comcast IP in Amherst, MA. No further info.

Hi,

Never guess when it comes to court filings .. either know or not & suffer from the ignorance... Did they offer you a settlement amount? What was it?

 

[tranquility]

The biggest problem I see with federal courts is that you cannot go down to your closest one & see filings in other courthouses across the country... they are still back in the stone age.

Go DOWN to the local court? As Scotty said, "How quaint."

Public Access to Court Electronic Records

You can see the filings without moving an inch from where you are sitting as you read this.

 

[musicman654321]

Go DOWN to the local court? As Scotty said, "How quaint."

Public Access to Court Electronic Records

You can see the filings without moving an inch from where you are sitting as you read this.

Hi,

Costs $$ right?

 

[tranquility]

Money, yes. Not $$, but cents. You'd have to suck down a lot of documents to be costly.

 

[Silverplum]

Hi,

Costs $$ right?

Holding your tiny hand...

"Access to court documents costs $0.08 per page. The cost to access a single document is capped at $2.40, the equivalent of 30 pages. The cap does not apply to name searches, reports that are not case-specific and transcripts of federal court proceedings.

By Judicial Conference policy, if your usage does not exceed $10 in a quarter, fees for that quarter are waived, effectively making the service free for most users."

Was THAT too difficult for you to do your ownself??

And who said everything in life is FREE?

 

[tranquility]

Unless the court house is within walking distance, with parking, even a short drive to the FEDERAL COURT HOUSE would cost more.

 

[quincy]

fdfschan, you are being sued by West Coast Productions for the illegal downloading of a movie. The District of Columbia court granted on February 3, 2011, West Coast's motion to take discovery and serve subpoenas on the ISPs of 5,829 John Doe defendants (two of the defendants, Doe 580 and Doe 1087, have already been dismissed from the suit).

What you need to do is file a motion to quash the subpoena served on Comcast if you wish to have the suit proceed against you anonymously. To challenge the release of your identifying information, you must file your identifying information with the court under seal along with your motion to proceed anonymously (listing your reason(s) why you should remain anonymous).

You must comply with all of the Court's requirements (see Civil Rule 5.1) and then notify Comcast (by fax or in writing) that you have filed a motion to quash within the time period noted by Comcast in their letter to you, or Comcast will turn over your identifying information to West Coast Productions. Once your identifying information is revealed, West Coast can more easily file an individual copyright infringement suit against you, a named defendant, in your own state.

You could also file a motion to dismiss on, perhaps, personal jurisdiction grounds or on improper joinder grounds.

Lightspeed Media Corp v Does 1-100, 1:10-cv-05604, and Millenium TGA, Inc v Does 1-100, 1:10-cv-05603, and CP Productions, Inc v Does 1-300, 1:10-cv-06255, and West Coast Productions, Inc v Does 1-535, 3:10-cv-94 (N.D. W Va, Dec 16, 2010) are some of several similar mass defendant copyright infringement suits that have been challenged.

Even if you are dismissed as a defendant in this particular case, once again, this would not mean that West Coast Productions cannot still file suit against you individually for copyright infringement in your state. This is a more costly route for them to take, which is why they "bundle" several defendants together in one suit.

I suggest you have an attorney in your area go over all of the facts of your case. Several of these "mass defendant suits" are being dismissed or several of the defendants are being dismissed from the suits. Although you can certainly try to do all of this on your own, seeing an attorney in your area and having an attorney handle the matter for you will probably be your best course of action.