FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2010-Sep-27 9:25 am
Technicalities will be overcome - subpoenas will be servedThe judge shot down the subpoenas on a technicality. So the Copyright Group will correct those defects and the case will move forward on the merits. Midcontinent just bought a little time is all. Then the case will have to be fought on whether US Copyright Group has power to have subpoenas issued. Based on precedent they do. | |
|
| KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ |
Kearnstd
Premium Member
2010-Sep-27 10:26 am
Re: Technicalities will be overcome - subpoenas will be servedUSCG will get more smackdowns though because they are using the process for straight profit and not for what it was intended.
You also have the fact that if they are not using a court in that district, do they really have a right to sue people anywhere in the country from Washington DC? | |
|
| |
to FFH5
said by FFH5:The judge shot down the subpoenas on a technicality. So the Copyright Group will correct those defects and the case will move forward on the merits. Midcontinent just bought a little time is all. Then the case will have to be fought on whether US Copyright Group has power to have subpoenas issued. Based on precedent they do. Technicality??!!!? Making up procedures to suit yourself? That's a technicality in your book, eh? Enjoy your blood money, dic**ad | |
|
| | Margolis Premium Member join:2003-11-24 Saint Louis, MO
1 recommendation |
Margolis
Premium Member
2010-Sep-27 4:32 pm
Re: Technicalities will be overcome - subpoenas will be servedsaid by EdmundGerber:said by FFH5:The judge shot down the subpoenas on a technicality. So the Copyright Group will correct those defects and the case will move forward on the merits. Midcontinent just bought a little time is all. Then the case will have to be fought on whether US Copyright Group has power to have subpoenas issued. Based on precedent they do. Technicality??!!!? Making up procedures to suit yourself? That's a technicality in your book, eh? Enjoy your blood money, dic**ad yes, a technicality. it was shot down because they were faxed instead of being delivered in the legally stipulated manner. | |
|
|
Process Serving? Whazzat?When I worked for an attorney, a subpoena always had to be served properly, either through a process server or registered mail, return receipt requested to prove the party had actually *received* the subpoena.
Via fax? How convenient and easy for USCG. It's cheap and dirty...and definitely out of order and not acceptable. If these extortionists are forced to follow the law it'll be costly. They'll have to shell out money to pay human process servers to hand deliver the subpoena, or rely on the US Mail to return a signed receipt. ALL of that costs money, a lot more than a fax. | |
|
| |
Re: Process Serving? Whazzat?Don't forget that in most cases you also need an attonery that is licensed in the state. I doubt they have attornies authorized to practice in all fifty states on staff. | |
|
| | |
Re: Process Serving? Whazzat?that can be done easily. They just need to hire a legal staff that took the National Bar and has paid their dues and that's it. | |
|
| | | |
Re: Process Serving? Whazzat?Nope you need to hire fifty legal staffs. That's where the cost starts coming in. Since this is a pure profit endeavor if cost exceeds revenue it dies. | |
|
| | | | OvrQualifiedSlightly Ahead Of Time Premium Member join:2002-01-27 Winter Park, FL |
Re: Process Serving? Whazzat?said by chimera4:Nope you need to hire fifty legal staffs. That's where the cost starts coming in. Since this is a pure profit endeavor if cost exceeds revenue it dies. Pretty much, because even if you took the 50 state bar, you'd have to be admitted Pro Hac Vice to a court you're not a member of the bar in...and for that you need an attorney on the ground to file the motion. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: Process Serving? Whazzat?It's been years, but I remember that lawyers here in Michigan who were licensed to practice in Florida were paid a premium because the FL bar exam was extremely difficult to pass.
I hate to admit it, but using our red-tape tangle of a legal system may be the key into shutting down the extortionists. What other route will they take if it becomes too expensive to pursue "pirates" on a case-by-case basis? | |
|
| | | |
to hottboiinnc4
There is no national bar. One must be admitted state-by-state, either by taking that state's bar exam or through a reciprocity agreement. | |
|
| | | | AVDRespice, Adspice, Prospice Premium Member join:2003-02-06 Onion, NJ |
AVD
Premium Member
2010-Sep-28 10:39 pm
Re: Process Serving? Whazzat?said by soccerguy9:There is no national bar. One must be admitted state-by-state, either by taking that state's bar exam or through a reciprocity agreement. Isn't there a federal bar, but it ceremonial? | |
|
| Gbcue Premium Member join:2001-09-30 Santa Rosa, CA |
to ShellMMG
Also remember the subpoena has to be signed by somebody that is local to the served person which costs even more $$$ if they have to hire lawyers in every district. | |
|
| HarddriveProud American and Infidel since 1968. Premium Member join:2000-09-20 Fort Worth, TX |
to ShellMMG
'registered mail, return receipt requested'
i just figured out how the USPS can get out of their money troubles. raise their registered mail rates for law firms. | |
|
| RARPSL join:1999-12-08 Suffern, NY |
to ShellMMG
said by ShellMMG:When I worked for an attorney, a subpoena always had to be served properly, either through a process server or registered mail, return receipt requested to prove the party had actually *received* the subpoena. While I know that the registered mail/return receipt route is valid (the sender either gets the return receipt back or the UNOPENED letter with a not-picked-up/refused notation), I dispute the validity of the process server route due to the practice of "Sewer Service" (where the process server claims to have served the papers while not actually doing so) unless it is done as part of a nail-and-mail effort (ie: Physical delivery along with the mailed one). I once was able to have such a "service" voided (along with the case being thrown out after it had resulted in a no-show on my part when I finally found out about the case) due to lack of notification when I showed that I was out of town at the time the server certified (ie: Lied) that I had been presented with the papers. Simple CLAIMS of physical delivery should not be acceptable without some other proof (the Return Receipt or the actual rejected letter). | |
|
Doctor FourMy other vehicle is a TARDIS Premium Member join:2000-09-05 Dallas, TX |
US Copyright Group is reminding me more and more of ACS:LawIn that they are employing similar questionable legal tactics, and that like ACS:Law, US Copyright Group seem to be solely in the business of profiting from piracy.
They may very well become the next targets in the 4chan coordinated DoS attacks against anti-piracy organizations. | |
|
| SimbaSevenI Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT ·StarLink
|
Re: US Copyright Group is reminding me more and more of ACS:Lawsaid by Doctor Four:In that they are employing similar questionable legal tactics, and that like ACS:Law, US Copyright Group seem to be solely in the business of profiting from piracy. How do we know the U.S. Copyright Group doesn't have hidden servers that "Pirate" their content? ..or it makes it look like it's pirating, therefore they can make their case against everyone even thinking of downloading a file. How do we know half of these "Pirates" are really their own servers? | |
|
| |
to Doctor Four
Co-ordinating DoS attacks is illegal. All this taking revenge back and forth will have consequences.
Profiting from piracy, at present, isn't. (on the enforcement side to be clear) | |
|
SimbaSevenI Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT ·StarLink
|
U.S. Coypyright Group Has South Dakota Subpoena Shot DownLooks like Karl's just waking up, too. It should say "South Dakota ISP has U.S. Copyright Group Subpoena Shot Down" ..or something like that.. From what it sounds like, it says that the U.S. Copyright Group shot down an ISP subpoena, not the other way around. | |
|
kadosHail Odin Premium Member join:2003-03-14 Watertown, SD |
kados
Premium Member
2010-Sep-27 11:28 am
WOWI wonder if that subpoena was for me.
Seriously, I'm with Midco in Watertown, SD and I am constantly downloading TV shows and the occaisionaly a movie.
Here's the deal, I know around 100 people who all are on Midco and are way bigger pirates than me, and I've never heard anyone EVER get a letter from Midco.
When I moved in with my girlfriend, she didn't have any internet service, we went to Midco, and got stand-alone internet, the 20/2 tier for $20 a month for 2 years. The lady at the local office asked me what we mostly do on the net, and I told her a little pc gaming, downloading movies and tv shows and she said the 20/2 tier is perfect for, now this is a quote "downloading movies from limewire".
Interesting this is the first I've heard of it | |
|
|
A T-Shirt MessageA kid walked onto a bus last week and his T-shirt read: "It's Not Piracy If There Wasn't A Parrot Involved..." | |
|
|
|