tagged w/ P2P
-
-
Jorge Bronze of wefightprivacy.com has been spending the last six months trying to pursue tens of thousands of fappers who don't believe that paying a chick to suck you off in a hotel room qualifies as "intellectual property."
Jorge argues that "these thieves with their sense of entitlement are destroying the future of this country and its future generations. Would you want to live in a world in which young teens are denied the opportunity to watch a 18 year old female get quadrupled penetrated and defecated on?"
Jorge does not include images of the cinematic brilliance of films like "Plunder My Booty 15" or "Ass Ram for Cash" on his websites. Instead he posts random mundane paintings by douchebags artists who were born too early to copyright their work.
Jorge has recently been having problems when it comes to proving that an IP address can be used to identify an infringer. Judges have told him that simply getting the location of an internet connection does not prove that the account owner engaged in illegal activity.
To get around this " so ridiculously obvious that you would have to be a POS opportunistic scumbag lawyer to try to exploit" issue, Mr. Bronze and his incestuous brother team of Bittorrent trackers has developed a software known as "Gotcha Bitch 1.0".
Jorge says the software is intended guarantee that his firm has located copyright infringers. He explains:
"While getting the contact info of an account holder will allow us to shame ad harass a person out of money, nothing expedites the process faster than sending a person a picture of him with his cock out."
Gotcha Bitch allows Wefightprivacy.com to take control of a suspected evil infringing fapper's webcam and to transmit messages directly to him.
The software is fool proof. "We try to get a picture of the cock. Every man knows exactly what his cock looks like. The second he sees the pics, he knows it's game over, man."
Despite being fool proof, wefightprivacy.com's software has not been able to completely avoid criticism.
Timmy Smitz, a 16 year old from Texas, was recently caught by the Gotcha Bitch Software. "I was sitting there having a good time stroking my junk, when suddenly a picture of Jorge Bronze popped up on my screen with a 'Gotcha Bitch' caption. I just curled into a ball and began crying all night...." Timmy is currently being treated for PTSD.
There have been even more serious consequences that have resulted from the use of the software. Bob Vagoo, a 79 year old from Cleveland was all hopped up on viagra and trying to enjoy the last fap of his life. Halfway through his viewing of "Dookiebooty 14", Mr. Vagoo was met with a "Gotcha Bitch" splash screen. Mr. Vagoo suffered a massive heart attack and was left a twisted, sweaty, naked mess.
When asked about Mr. Vagoo's death, Jorge could only say that "I didn't know him personally. Plus, I'm a lawyer, I just live for the paychecks."Jorge Bronze of wefightprivacy.com has been spending the last six months trying to... more
-
-
This is a follow-up to the report that detailed how Mr. John Steele, of Steele Hansmeier/ wefightpiracy/ Steele-law, recently mailed out signed pre-settlement letters with dates that are 4-5 years off from being accurate.
The included picture is a combination of two screen captures from the declarations of support for expedited discovery by an employee of Mr. Steele's Media Copyright Group.
The September signature comes from the declaration for the Hard Drive Productions v. Does 1-1000 case which was filed in Illinios(1:10-cv-05606). The September declaration starts out:
I, Paul Hansmeier, declare:
I am a manager of Media Copyright Group LLC.("MCG"). On behalf of its clients......
The May 2011 signature comes from the declaration for the Hard Drive Productions v Does 1-14 case that was filed in Illinios(1:11-cv-02981). The attorney for the plaintiff on that case is listed as Hard Drive Productions PRO Se. The fact that HDP is representing itself in that case makes me wonder if they photocopied the declaration from the other case.
If one reads the full declarations for both cases, one will notice how it is obviously the same author. However a couple of words changed between the two.
The May declaration starts out with:
I, Peter Hansmeier, declare under penalty of perjury as true and correct that:
1. I am a technician at Media Copyright Group LLC.("MCG). On behalf of its clients.....
---There is a very slight chance that Mr. Steele happens to employ both Peter and Paul. However, I can see no logical explanation for why the signatures are nearly identical.
If you look at the P and the H, the curves are exactly the same. The May signature does not include a full name, but rather is nothing more than initials. The May signature is also way above the signature line. It is as though someone tried to forge or photocopy the signature from one declaration to the other. If you look closely, the signature even have the same several small black dots on the perimeter. The dots are in the same location
Hopefully this is all some bizarre coincidence. If it is not, then it looks like someone involved with John Steele's blackmail letter campaign is attempting to defraud the courts. Looks like it is time to update my pending ethics complaint against his firm.....
For anyone who is unaware, Paul Hansmeier is Mr. Steele's partner in his wefightpiracy.com law firm. The issues about his signature are potentially very serious since he may be trying to conceal his relationship with Mr. Steele's firm. Mr. Hansmeier may also be attempting to dodge the conflict of interest charges that may result from him being a lawyer that is producing evidence so his partner can sue people.This is a follow-up to the report that detailed how Mr. John Steele, of Steele... more
-
-
(public domain pic, Mr. Steele)
I was recently reading the Arstechnica article: "Settle up: voicemails show P2P porn law firms in action" when I noticed this threat from a user named "John Steele"(99% sure it really is Mr. Steele):
++++"Unauthorized copying" is stealing and is why almost every judge we have been in front of throws out these goofy motions to quash you photocopy from each other. Sure, one judge in 10 doesn't like porn and kicks our case (and this causes ARS to act like this litigation is on its deathbed). [I wonder what the judge would say if he heard about how Mr. Steele thinks the only reason he tossed the case is because he doesn't like porn. The day that judge tore Mr. Steele a new one, must have been quite embarrassing for Mr. Steele]
Well, every couple of days we come here for fun to see what crazy things are written by armchair lawyers. I would be careful though, we were able to figure out one of the posters on an earlier 'article' and our client dropped him from the suit . . . and sued him directly the next day. Something tells me settlement will be tough.[I can not comprehend any reason why Mr. Steele would feel the need to try to threaten people for discussing their cases with each other. If they are just armchair lawyers, why is he paying so much attention? Also, I wonder what figured out refers to? If he tried to dox someone, I think it is only fair to return the favor]++++
After reading that comment, I decided to look into what might drive an attorney to try to threaten the Internet. I figured a person's blog is the most accurate representation of his internal workings, so I searched for a wefightpiracy_com blog. I couldn't find one, so I went with reviewing his familylawlifeline_com blog.
His familylawlifeline is intended to pertain only to his family law firm. However, I believe the statements contained within are accurate representations of the moral man that Mr. Steele once was(all of this is my opinion in case I need to clarify that for lawyers who may be reading this). The awkward highlights that emphasize how money can corrupt anyone, even a self-proclaimed "family man"
1) June 2008 "Even Attorneys can be bullies"
"I suppose I can see how being an ass might get you somewhere if you are up against a pro se party who has no idea of what is happening, or maybe a timid transaction attorney that somehow found themselves in a divorce case. "
----Being an ass does seem to be helping Mr. Steele force settlements out of people
"I am not sure why some Family Law attorneys purposely try to build up their mystique as a jerk."
----I asked myself the same question after I read the comment on the Arstechnica article
"Standing up to a bully, whether some blowhard attorney, or an 8th grader feels good.Try it sometime."
----I agree, Mr. Steele. Standing up to a bully(you) does feel quite good
see the rest here:http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/197(basically he says he enjoys beating bullies and stopping their "antics")
2)March 2010 "How to be (or find) a happy lawyer, Part 1 of 2"
"First, I started my own firm a few years ago. This means I don’t have to take on clients I do not like, or that I think are scum bags. And the associates in my firm know they don’t have to represent scum bags."
---Mr. Steele's firm is representing individuals, who make millions each year while simultaneously demanding $1000s from working class individuals. Mr. Steele's clients have acknowledged the fact that they have nothing to lose, which probably means they don't care about people's guilt or innocence so long as "the check clears". If you try to make millions by blackmailing the parents of some teenager who downloaded a porno that only cost you a couple grand to make....I think you are a scum bag
"While I know other attorneys who believe that “all money is green”, I respectfully submit that getting the “what the hell are you arguing?” look from a judge, or being known as a legal whore in the relatively small community of family lawyers is not for me. I admit I like to take the high road and drill opposing counsels who are argue whatever their client’s want them to say (assuming the check clears of course)."
---Mr. Steele works for free in order to exploit US copyright laws so that his client can turn low budget adult films into cash cows. None of the money goes to the models in the videos. Models who accepted a payment of a couple $1000 just so they could pay their bills. If that doesn't make you a legal whore, I don't know what does.
Mr. Steele likes to take the high road???Really??Can someone help me find evidence for that
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/341
3)August 2010 "Liar Liar Pants on Fire"
Mr. Steele discusses how a new attorney attempted to claim that Mr. Steele had lied to the court. The new attorney claimed that Mr. Steele did not document the fact that he was refiling a case on his petition.
" Now the other attorney looked pretty stupid, because he either cannot read or he was too lazy to read my Petition (I bet the former)."
----Mr. Steele sent out signed pre-settlement letters with dates 4-5 years in the past and false statements about not being able to contact people. I wonder which of the two choices he would pick to refer to his actions
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/542
4) August 2008 "Attorney's work for.....Money!"
Mr. Steele discusses how he feels that people should realize that lawyers need to make money and that you should not expect them to work Pro Bono.
"The moral of this story is don’t ask attorneys to provide free legal services, and be very afraid of those attorneys that would actually agree to such a request."
---So one should not ask a lawyer to work for free. I wonder how Mr. Steele feels about attorneys, like himself, who offer to work for free. I would be even more scared of individuals who volunteer to work for free. Part of the reason Mr. Steele is using mass mailing is so he can curb his costs since he works for free
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/219
5)June 2008 "Courtesy Please"
Mr. Steele discusses losing his cool.
"People want to be respected. And when we do not get respect, we get indignant and lash out."
---I wonder if Mr. Steele was able to see the accused as more that lying thieves(his opinion), then would he be able to sympathize with the anger coming from the thousands of individuals his firm is disrespecting
see the rest here:http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/204
6) October 2009 "The Judge is always Right"
"1. Reputation is everything in the legal system. And attorneys and judges know which divorce lawyers will sell their services to the anti-Christ if he paid a retainer."
---The way things have been going so far, Mr. Steele's reputation is going to take quite the hit. Federal judges have "eviscerated him for abusing the legal system" and have called his cases "a fishing expedition"
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/341
There are additional blog entries at: www.familylawlifeline_com
I would post more, but I'm not sure whether or not I have already posted an amount that will result in Mr. Steele trying to sue me.
According to the aforementioned Arstechnica article, Mr. Steele's firm made at least $43,000 last week. The ability for money to corrupt is amazing at times. Had I met Mr. Steele years ago, when he still stood by the morals he had as divorce attorney, I would have nothing but respect. Considering how his firm is acting these days, I must consider him to be a bully and will fight back. At least it is comforting to know that the old Mr. Steele would support me............(public domain pic, Mr. Steele)
I was recently reading the Arstechnica article:... more
-
-
(public domain pic, Mr. Steele)
I was recently reading the Arstechnica article: "Settle up: voicemails show P2P porn law firms in action"(http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/settle-up-voicemails-show-p2p-po...) when I noticed this threat from a user named "John Steele"(99% sure it really is Mr. Steele):
++++"Unauthorized copying" is stealing and is why almost every judge we have been in front of throws out these goofy motions to quash you photocopy from each other. Sure, one judge in 10 doesn't like porn and kicks our case (and this causes ARS to act like this litigation is on its deathbed). [I wonder what the judge would say if he heard about how Mr. Steele thinks the only reason he tossed the case is because he doesn't like porn. The day that judge tore Mr. Steele a new one, must have been quite embarrassing for Mr. Steele]
Well, every couple of days we come here for fun to see what crazy things are written by armchair lawyers. I would be careful though, we were able to figure out one of the posters on an earlier 'article' and our client dropped him from the suit . . . and sued him directly the next day. Something tells me settlement will be tough.[I can not comprehend any reason why Mr. Steele would feel the need to try to threaten people for discussing their cases with each other. If they are just armchair lawyers, why is he paying so much attention? Also, I wonder what figured out refers to? If he tried to dox someone, I think it is only fair to return the favor]++++
After reading that comment, I decided to look into what might drive an attorney to try to threaten the Internet. I figured a person's blog is the most accurate representation of his internal workings, so I searched for a wefightpiracy_com blog. I couldn't find one, so I went with reviewing his familylawlifeline_com blog.
His familylawlifeline is intended to pertain only to his family law firm. However, I believe the statements contained within are accurate representations of the moral man that Mr. Steele once was(all of this is my opinion in case I need to clarify that for lawyers who may be reading this). The awkward highlights that emphasize how money can corrupt anyone, even a self-proclaimed "family man"
1) June 2008 "Even Attorneys can be bullies"
"I suppose I can see how being an ass might get you somewhere if you are up against a pro se party who has no idea of what is happening, or maybe a timid transaction attorney that somehow found themselves in a divorce case. "
----Being an ass does seem to be helping Mr. Steele force settlements out of people
"I am not sure why some Family Law attorneys purposely try to build up their mystique as a jerk."
----I asked myself the same question after I read the comment on the Arstechnica article
"Standing up to a bully, whether some blowhard attorney, or an 8th grader feels good.Try it sometime."
----I agree, Mr. Steele. Standing up to a bully(you) does feel quite good
see the rest here:http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/197(basically he says he enjoys beating bully and stopping their "antics")
2)March 2010 "How to be (or find) a happy lawyer, Part 1 of 2"
"First, I started my own firm a few years ago. This means I don’t have to take on clients I do not like, or that I think are scum bags. And the associates in my firm know they don’t have to represent scum bags."
---Mr. Steele's firm is representing individuals, who make millions each year while simultaneously demanding $1000s from working class individuals. Mr. Steele's clients have acknowledged the fact that they have nothing to lose, which probably means they don't care about people's guilt or innocence so long as "the check clears". If you try to make millions by blackmailing the parents of some teenager who downloaded a porno that only cost you a couple grand to make....I think you are a scum bag
"While I know other attorneys who believe that “all money is green”, I respectfully submit that getting the “what the hell are you arguing?” look from a judge, or being known as a legal whore in the relatively small community of family lawyers is not for me. I admit I like to take the high road and drill opposing counsels who are argue whatever their client’s want them to say (assuming the check clears of course)."
---Mr. Steele works for free in order to exploit US copyright laws so that his client can turn low budget adult films into cash cows. None of the money goes to the models in the videos. Models who accepted a payment of a couple $1000 just so they could pay their bills. If that doesn't make you a legal whore, I don't know what does.
Mr. Steele likes to take the high road???Really??Can someone help me find evidence for that
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/341
3)August 2010 "Liar Liar Pants on Fire"
Mr. Steele discusses how a new attorney attempted to claim that Mr. Steele had lied to the court. The new attorney claimed that Mr. Steele did not document the fact that he was refiling a case on his petition.
" Now the other attorney looked pretty stupid, because he either cannot read or he was too lazy to read my Petition (I bet the former)."
----Mr. Steele sent out signed pre-settlement letters with dates 4-5 years in the past and false statements about not being able to contact people. I wonder which of the two choices he would pick to refer to his actions
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/542
4) August 2008 "Attorney's work for.....Money!"
Mr. Steele discusses how he feels that people should realize that lawyers need to make money and that you should not expect them to work Pro Bono.
"The moral of this story is don’t ask attorneys to provide free legal services, and be very afraid of those attorneys that would actually agree to such a request."
---So one should not ask a lawyer to work for free. I wonder how Mr. Steele feels about attorneys, like himself, who offer to work for free. I would be even more scared of individuals who volunteer to work for free. Part of the reason Mr. Steele is using mass mailing is so he can curb his costs since he works for free
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/219
5)June 2008 "Courtesy Please"
Mr. Steele discusses losing his cool.
"People want to be respected. And when we do not get respect, we get indignant and lash out."
---I wonder if Mr. Steele was able to see the accused as more that lying thieves(his opinion), then would he be able to sympathize with the anger coming from the thousands of individuals his firm is disrespecting
see the rest here:http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/204
6) October 2009 "The Judge is always Right"
"1. Reputation is everything in the legal system. And attorneys and judges know which divorce lawyers will sell their services to the anti-Christ if he paid a retainer. I don’t."
---The way things have been going so far, Mr. Steele's reputation is going to take quite the hit. Federal judges have "eviscerated him for abusing the legal system" and have called his cases "a fishing expedition"
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline_com/archives/341
There are additional blog entries at: www.familylawlifeline_com
I would post more, but I'm not sure whether or not I have already posted an amount that will result in Mr. Steele trying to sue me.
According to the aforementioned Arstechnica article, Mr. Steele's firm made at least $43,000 last week. The ability for money to corrupt is amazing at times. Had I met Mr. Steele years ago, when he still stood by the morals he had as divorce attorney, I would have nothing but respect. Considering how his firm is acting these days, I must consider him to be a bully and will fight back. At least it is comforting to know that the old Mr. Steele would support me............(public domain pic, Mr. Steele)
I was recently reading the Arstechnica article:... more
-
-
(public domain pic, Mr. Steele)
I was recently reading the Arstechnica article: "Settle up: voicemails show P2P porn law firms in action" when I noticed this threat from a user named "John Steele"(99% sure it really is Mr. Steele):
++++"Unauthorized copying" is stealing and is why almost every judge we have been in front of throws out these goofy motions to quash you photocopy from each other. Sure, one judge in 10 doesn't like porn and kicks our case (and this causes ARS to act like this litigation is on its deathbed). [I wonder what the judge would say if he heard about how Mr. Steele thinks the only reason he tossed the case is because he doesn't like porn. The day that judge tore Mr. Steele a new one, must have been quite embarrassing for Mr. Steele]
Well, every couple of days we come here for fun to see what crazy things are written by armchair lawyers. I would be careful though, we were able to figure out one of the posters on an earlier 'article' and our client dropped him from the suit . . . and sued him directly the next day. Something tells me settlement will be tough.[I can not comprehend any reason why Mr. Steele would feel the need to try to threaten people for discussing their cases with each other. If they are just armchair lawyers, why is paying so much attention? Also, I wonder what figured out refers to? If he tried to dox someone, I think it is only fair to return the favor]++++
After reading that comment, I decided to look into what might drive an attorney to try to threaten the Internet. I figured a person's blog is the most accurate representation of his internal workings, so I searched for a wefightpiracy.com blog. I couldn't find one, so I went with reviewing his familylawlifeline.com blog.
His familylawlifeline is intended to pertain only to his family law firm. However, I believe the statements contained within are accurate representations of the moral man that Mr. Steele once was(all of this is my opinion in case I need to clarify that for lawyers who may be reading this). The awkward highlights that emphasize how money can corrupt anyone, even a self-proclaimed "family man"
1) June 2008 "Even Attorneys can be bullies"
"I suppose I can see how being an ass might get you somewhere if you are up against a pro se party who has no idea of what is happening, or maybe a timid transaction attorney that somehow found themselves in a divorce case. "
----Being an ass does seem to be helping Mr. Steele force settlements out of people
"I am not sure why some Family Law attorneys purposely try to build up their mystique as a jerk."
----I asked myself the same question after I read the comment on the Arstechnica article
"Standing up to a bully, whether some blowhard attorney, or an 8th grader feels good.Try it sometime."
----I agree, Mr. Steele. Standing up to a bully(you) does feel quite good
see the rest here:http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/197(basically he says he enjoys beating bully and stopping their "antics")
2)March 2010 "How to be (or find) a happy lawyer, Part 1 of 2"
"First, I started my own firm a few years ago. This means I don’t have to take on clients I do not like, or that I think are scum bags. And the associates in my firm know they don’t have to represent scum bags."
---Mr. Steele's firm is representing individuals, who make millions each year while simultaneously demanding $1000s from working class individuals. Mr. Steele's clients have acknowledged the fact that they have nothing to lose, which probably means they don't care about people's guilt or innocence so long as "the check clears". If you try to make millions by blackmailing the parents of some teenager who downloaded a porno that only cost you a couple grand to make....I think you are a scum bag
"While I know other attorneys who believe that “all money is green”, I respectfully submit that getting the “what the hell are you arguing?” look from a judge, or being known as a legal whore in the relatively small community of family lawyers is not for me. I admit I like to take the high road and drill opposing counsels who are argue whatever their client’s want them to say (assuming the check clears of course)."
---Mr. Steele works for free in order to exploit US copyright laws so that his client can turn low budget adult films into cash cows. None of the money goes to the models in the videos. Models who accepted a payment of a couple $1000 just so they could pay their bills. If that doesn't make you a legal whore, I don't know what does.
Mr. Steele likes to take the high road???Really??Can someone help me find evidence for that
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/341
3)August 2010 "Liar Liar Pants on Fire"
Mr. Steele discusses how a new attorney attempted to claim that Mr. Steele had lied to the court. The new attorney claimed that Mr. Steele did not document the fact that he was refiling a case on his petition.
" Now the other attorney looked pretty stupid, because he either cannot read or he was too lazy to read my Petition (I bet the former)."
----Mr. Steele sent out signed pre-settlement letters with dates 4-5 years in the past and false statements about not being able to contact people. I wonder which of the two choices he would pick to refer to his actions
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/542
4) August 2008 "Attorney's work for.....Money!"
Mr. Steele discusses how he feels that people should realize that lawyers need to make money and that you should not expect them to work Pro Bono.
"The moral of this story is don’t ask attorneys to provide free legal services, and be very afraid of those attorneys that would actually agree to such a request."
---So one should not ask a lawyer to work for free. I wonder how Mr. Steele feels about attorneys, like himself, who offer to work for free. I would be even more scared of individuals who volunteer to work for free. Part of the reason Mr. Steele is using mass mailing is so he can curb his costs since he works for free
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/219
5)June 2008 "Courtesy Please"
Mr. Steele discusses losing his cool.
"People want to be respected. And when we do not get respect, we get indignant and lash out."
---I wonder if Mr. Steele was able to see the accused as more that lying thieves(his opinion), then would he be able to sympathize with the anger coming from the thousands of individuals his firm is disrespecting
see the rest here:http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/204
6) October 2009 "The Judge is always Right"
"1. Reputation is everything in the legal system. And attorneys and judges know which divorce lawyers will sell their services to the anti-Christ if he paid a retainer. I don’t."
---The way things have been going so far, Mr. Steele's reputation is going to take quite the hit. Federal judges have "eviscerated him for abusing the legal system" and have called his cases "a fishing expedition"
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/341
There are additional blog entries at: www.familylawlifeline.com
I would post more, but I'm not sure whether or not I have already posted an amount that will result in Mr. Steele trying to sue me.
According to the aforementioned Arstechnica article, Mr. Steele's firm made at least $43,000 last week. The ability for money to corrupt is amazing at times. Had I met Mr. Steele years ago, when he still held by the moral he had as divorce attorney, I would have nothing but respect. Considering how his firm is acting these days, I must consider him to be a bully and will fight back. At least it is comforting to know that the old Mr. Steele would support me............(public domain pic, Mr. Steele)
I was recently reading the Arstechnica article:... more
-
-
(public domain pic, Mr. Steele)
I was recently reading the Arstechnica article: "Settle up: voicemails show P2P porn law firms in action"(http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/settle-up-voicemails-show-p2p-porn-law-firms-in-action.ars?comments=1&start=80#comments-bar) when I noticed this threat from a user named "John Steele"(99% sure it really is Mr. Steele):
++++"Unauthorized copying" is stealing and is why almost every judge we have been in front of throws out these goofy motions to quash you photocopy from each other. Sure, one judge in 10 doesn't like porn and kicks our case (and this causes ARS to act like this litigation is on its deathbed). [I wonder what the judge would say if he heard about how Mr. Steele thinks the only reason he tossed the case is because he doesn't like porn. The day that judge tore Mr. Steele a new one, must have been quite embarrassing for Mr. Steele]
Well, every couple of days we come here for fun to see what crazy things are written by armchair lawyers. I would be careful though, we were able to figure out one of the posters on an earlier 'article' and our client dropped him from the suit . . . and sued him directly the next day. Something tells me settlement will be tough.[I can not comprehend any reason why Mr. Steele would feel the need to try to threaten people for discussing their cases with each other. If they are just armchair lawyers, why is paying so much attention? Also, I wonder what figured out refers to? If he tried to dox someone, I think it is only fair to return the favor]++++
After reading that comment, I decided to look into what might drive an attorney to try to threaten the Internet. I figured a person's blog is the most accurate representation of his internal workings, so I searched for a wefightpiracy.com blog. I couldn't find one, so I went with reviewing his familylawlifeline.com blog.
His familylawlifeline is intended to pertain only to his family law firm. However, I believe the statements contained within are accurate representations of the moral man that Mr. Steele once was(all of this is my opinion in case I need to clarify that for lawyers who may be reading this). The awkward highlights that emphasize how money can corrupt anyone, even a self-proclaimed "family man"
1) June 2008 "Even Attorneys can be bullies"
"I suppose I can see how being an ass might get you somewhere if you are up against a pro se party who has no idea of what is happening, or maybe a timid transaction attorney that somehow found themselves in a divorce case. "
----Being an ass does seem to be helping Mr. Steele force settlements out of people
"I am not sure why some Family Law attorneys purposely try to build up their mystique as a jerk."
----I asked myself the same question after I read the comment on the Arstechnica article
"Standing up to a bully, whether some blowhard attorney, or an 8th grader feels good.Try it sometime."
----I agree, Mr. Steele. Standing up to a bully(you) does feel quite good
see the rest here:http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/197(basically he says he enjoys beating bully and stopping their "antics")
2)March 2010 "How to be (or find) a happy lawyer, Part 1 of 2"
"First, I started my own firm a few years ago. This means I don’t have to take on clients I do not like, or that I think are scum bags. And the associates in my firm know they don’t have to represent scum bags."
---Mr. Steele's firm is representing individuals, who make millions each year while simultaneously demanding $1000s from working class individuals. Mr. Steele's clients have acknowledged the fact that they have nothing to lose, which probably means they don't care about people's guilt or innocence so long as "the check clears". If you try to make millions by blackmailing the parents of some teenager who downloaded a porno that only cost you a couple grand to make....I think you are a scum bag
"While I know other attorneys who believe that “all money is green”, I respectfully submit that getting the “what the hell are you arguing?” look from a judge, or being known as a legal whore in the relatively small community of family lawyers is not for me. I admit I like to take the high road and drill opposing counsels who are argue whatever their client’s want them to say (assuming the check clears of course)."
---Mr. Steele works for free in order to exploit US copyright laws so that his client can turn low budget adult films into cash cows. None of the money goes to the models in the videos. Models who accepted a payment of a couple $1000 just so they could pay their bills. If that doesn't make you a legal whore, I don't know what does.
Mr. Steele likes to take the high road???Really??Can someone help me find evidence for that
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/341
3)August 2010 "Liar Liar Pants on Fire"
Mr. Steele discusses how a new attorney attempted to claim that Mr. Steele had lied to the court. The new attorney claimed that Mr. Steele did not document the fact that he was refiling a case on his petition.
" Now the other attorney looked pretty stupid, because he either cannot read or he was too lazy to read my Petition (I bet the former)."
----Mr. Steele sent out signed pre-settlement letters with dates 4-5 years in the past and false statements about not being able to contact people. I wonder which of the two choices he would pick to refer to his actions
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/542
4) August 2008 "Attorney's work for.....Money!"
Mr. Steele discusses how he feels that people should realize that lawyers need to make money and that you should not expect them to work Pro Bono.
"The moral of this story is don’t ask attorneys to provide free legal services, and be very afraid of those attorneys that would actually agree to such a request."
---So one should not ask a lawyer to work for free. I wonder how Mr. Steele feels about attorneys, like himself, who offer to work for free. I would be even more scared of individuals who volunteer to work for free. Part of the reason Mr. Steele is using mass mailing is so he can curb his costs since he works for free
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/219
5)June 2008 "Courtesy Please"
Mr. Steele discusses losing his cool.
"People want to be respected. And when we do not get respect, we get indignant and lash out."
---I wonder if Mr. Steele was able to see the accused as more that lying thieves(his opinion), then would he be able to sympathize with the anger coming from the thousands of individuals his firm is disrespecting
see the rest here:http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/204
6) October 2009 "The Judge is always Right"
"1. Reputation is everything in the legal system. And attorneys and judges know which divorce lawyers will sell their services to the anti-Christ if he paid a retainer. I don’t."
---The way things have been going so far, Mr. Steele's reputation is going to take quite the hit. Federal judges have "eviscerated him for abusing the legal system" and have called his cases "a fishing expedition"
see the rest here: http://familylawlifeline.com/archives/341
There are additional blog entries at: www.familylawlifeline.com
I would post more, but I'm not sure whether or not I have already posted an amount that will result in Mr. Steele trying to sue me.
According to the aforementioned Arstechnica article, Mr. Steele's firm made at least $43,000 last week. The ability for money to corrupt is amazing at times. Had I met Mr. Steele years ago, when he still held by the moral he had as divorce attorney, I would have nothing but respect. Considering how his firm is acting these days, I must consider him to be a bully and will fight back. At least it is comforting to know that the old Mr. Steele would support me............(public domain pic, Mr. Steele)
I was recently reading the Arstechnica article:... more
-
-
https://www.iardc.org/newrules2010.htm
The op-ed is being written due to multiple requests for ideas about what to include in ethics complaints against Mr. Steele. This list will be updated as frequently as is necessary to produce the most accurate list possible:
Preserving Integrity of Adjudicative Process
[12] Lawyers have a special obligation to protect a tribunal against criminal or fraudulent conduct that undermines the integrity of the adjudicative process, such as bribing, intimidating or otherwise unlawfully communicating with a witness, juror, court official or other participant in the proceeding
------Mr. Steele's firm has been using Mark Lutz to contact individuals in hopes that he will be able to threaten people into settling.
RULE 1.2: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION AND ALLOCATION OF AUTHORITY BETWEEN CLIENT AND LAWYER
[10] The lawyer is required to avoid assisting the client, for example, by drafting or delivering documents that the lawyer knows are fraudulent
-----Mr. Steele's firm has sent out settlement letters with dates 4-5 years off and decietful statements that claim his firm has been unable to get in touch with certain individuals.
RULE 1.3: DILIGENCE
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.
[2] A lawyer's work load must be controlled so that each matter can be handled competently.
-----Mr. Steele appears to have started to lose track of some of his interactions with John Does, which means his work load is becoming unmanageable
RULE 1.7: CONFLICT OF INTEREST: CURRENT CLIENTS
Personal Interest Conflicts
[10] The lawyer's own interests should not be permitted to have an adverse effect on representation of a client. If the probity of a lawyer's own conduct in a transaction is in serious question, it may be difficult or impossible for the lawyer to give a client detached advice.
-----Mr. Steele paid for the creation of the software his firm uses to track Bittorrent traffic and he also pays the salary of the individuals who produce his evidence. Mr. Steele has a financial interest in his software producing guilty verdicts which means that he can not claim to be able to absolutely represent the interests of his client(assuming his client is interested in justice rather than merely blackmailing people out of money)
Identifying Conflicts of Interest: Material Limitation
[8] Even where there is no direct adverseness, a conflict of interest exists if there is a significant risk that a lawyer's ability to consider, recommend or carry out an appropriate course of action for the client will be materially limited as a result of the lawyer's other responsibilities or interests.
----Mr. Steele's need for his software to be effective/accurate results in a conflict of interest that inhibits his ability to consider the possibility that further investigation is necessary to determine whether or not the accused is guilty.
Nonlitigation Conflicts
[7]. Relevant factors in determining whether there is significant potential for material limitation include the functions being performed by the lawyer, the likelihood that disagreements will arise and the likely prejudice to the client from the conflict.
-------Mr. Steele is attempting to function as an evidence gatherer and prosecutor. His behavior will inevitably result in prejudice to his client
RULE 3.2: EXPEDITING LITIGATION
A lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client.
[1] Dilatory practices bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Nor will a failure to expedite be reasonable if done for the purpose of frustrating an opposing party’s attempt to obtain rightful redress or repose. It is not a justification that similar conduct is often tolerated by the bench and bar. The question is whether a competent lawyer acting in good faith would regard the course of action as having some substantial purpose other than delay. Realizing financial or other benefit from otherwise improper delay in litigation is not a legitimate interest of the client.
-----Mr. Steele's firm has made repeated attempts to delay the legal process in hopes of leaving defendants in limbo so that his firm will have additional time to extract settlements
RULE 3.4 Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel
(a) A lawyer shall not:
(1) (a) unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence or unlawfully alter
(d) in pretrial procedure, make a frivolous discovery request or fail to make reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally proper discovery request by an opposing party;
-------Unfortunately, Mr. Steele's firm is managing to exploit a legal loophole which allows them to conceal evidence during the pre-settlement period. If his firm was filing an actual lawsuit, it would be required to show the evidence to the accused before demanding a settlement. This is the by product of the same corrupt legal system that allowed the corrupt(imo) Judge Howell to rule on copyright cases despite her well known ties to the RIAA
RULE 4.1 Truthfulness in Statements to Others
In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly:
(a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person
-----The letters that include inaccurate dates and false statements about contacting individuals=blatant lies
RULE 4.3 Dealing With Unrepresented Person
The lawyer shall not give legal advice to an unrepresented person, other than the advice to secure counsel, if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the interests of such a person are or have a reasonable possibility of being in conflict with the interests of the client.
----I personally consider calling someone up and telling them that if they don't settle they will have to spend a lot more money and spend a ton of time in court to be the equivalent of providing legal advice. Advice which would be in violation of this rule
RULE 5.5 Unauthorized Practice of Law;Multijurisdictional Practice of Law
(a) A lawyer shall not:
(a) practice law in a jurisdiction in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction;, or
(b) assist a another in doing so.
--------Assuming the aforementioned issues can be validated, then Mr. Steele's employment of Brett Gibbs in California would violate this rule
RULE 7.3: DIRECT CONTACT WITH PROSPECTIVE CLIENTS
(a) A lawyer shall not by in‑person, live telephone or real-time electronic contact solicit professional employment from a prospective client when a significant motive for the lawyer's doing so is the lawyer's pecuniary gain, unless the person contacted:
(1) is a lawyer; or
(2) has a family, close personal, or prior professional relationship with the lawyer.
---------There have been multiple reports that Mr. Steele has shown up to porn conventions in order to try to drum up new clients. He workshttps://www.iardc.org/newrules2010.htm
The op-ed is being written due to multiple... more
-
-
(I suspect that there are additional letters, however since I have not confirmed that assumption the title will remain "letter" for now.)
I recently obtained a copy of a signed letter from the office of Steele Hansmeier PLLC(wefightpiracy_com) that is intended to serve as a follow-up to one of the firm's "settlement letters." The date on the letter is in March of 2011.
The first sentence of the letter basically states: On March _, 2007 our office sent you a letter regarding the aforementioned copyright infringement case that was filed on September _, 2006
Those are not typos, well at least not on my part.
The letter continues with a statement that claims that Mr. Steele's office has been unable to get in touch with the recipient.
Odd thing is, the e-mail address that is listed under the mailing address on the letter is not the e-mail address associated with the recipient's ISP. The only way Mr. Steele's firm could obtain the address would be by asking for it during a phone call. One of the five calls which Mr. Steele's firm would like to pretend never happened. The recipient said no to settling which is probably something his firm never expected to hear
The letter concludes with a new settlement deadline of mid April 2011. At the very end is Mr. Steele's signature(he signed off on extremely inaccurate dates and a blatant lie)
Personally, I believe that the implications of this letter are extremely disturbing. For one, Mr. Steele's firm appears to not bother proof-reading any of its letters. Mr. Steele is comfortable with asking for thousands of dollars from people, but he can't take 10 seconds to at least review the first sentence of his settlement letters.
Assuming the incorrect dates were not the result of a typo, then they must be the result of faulty automated software. No human being would shift from 2011 to 2007 to 2006 then back to 2011. If the incorrect dates came from automated software, it must have been programmed by amateurs for it to be so inaccurate.
Was Mr. Steele's bittorrent tracking software programmed by the same people who attempted to insert dates into the settlement letters?
No one knows how his software works, nor do they know if his firm takes the same sort of liberties with accurately typing IP addresses as they do with dates. Mix-up a few numbers and you end up suing the wrong person
If I was on a jury, I wouldn't trust evidence being created by family law attorney turned porn pirate chaser who is apparently too busy to get the date right on what is supposed to be a settlement letter
The closest thing I have heard about that one could interpret as an excuse for the obvious errors, is that Mr. Steele doesn't have very much free time. I guess that is understandable when you are attempting to threaten to sue thousands of people in multiple states and Canada. Looks like Mr. Steele's class is quickly becoming unmanageable.
I have advised the source of the letter to notify the courts that he will address the issue head on, once he figures out how to get back to 2007.
If anyone else received a similar letter, hold on to it. Mr. Steele's colossal screw-up, and his official signature that essentially approves of failing to proof-read, fact check, and tell time are factors which may sway the court's opinion in your favor. Most federal judges already disapprove of his behavior, and this will just add one more reason for another judge to tear his cases apart(I suspect that there are additional letters, however since I have not confirmed that... more
-
-
Recent evidence indicates that copyright troll John Steele, of wefightpiracy aka Steele Hansmeier PLLC, is attempting to sue so many John Does at once that he and his staff are losing track of their interactions with the Does. The evidence comes from an anonymous source, who stated that he had received one of Mr. Steele's settlement letters back in late January. The letter demanded $2900 by Mid February. The settlement letter deadline passed and then one of Mr. Steele's associates contacted my source via phone. My source explained to Mr. Steele's associate that he has no idea what Mr. Steele is talking about and that he does not even know what Bittorrent is. Mr. Steele's associate, Mark Lutz, appears to not want to take "I am innocent and you can't have my money" for an answer. Mr. Lutz called roughly 5 times within two days and then sent an e-mail to my source. During the last call my source received, he once again said no to settling. A few weeks went by, and my source received another e-mail this time stating that Mr. Steele's firm had not been able to get in touch with him(5 calls and 2 e-mails don't count as getting in touch) but they are willing to do him the generous favor of letting him pay them $2900 by mid April so that my source can avoid going to court for something he did not do. Best part is, the e-mail address that his firm sent the messages to is not my source's primary address. He gave them the address during one of the calls, which proves that Mr. Steele's firm is lying about not being able to contact him
Following this awkward scenario, an e-mail was sent to Mr. Steele's jlsteele@wefightpiracy_com address(it's really a gmail account. Every e-mail address he has appears to be g-mail) which asked whether or not Mr. Steele and his associates are documenting their interactions with the accused. The message also asked why his firm is not offering payment plans if the settlement deadlines apparently do not mean anything. No response to the the initial message. Concerned that Mr. Steele may merely be overworked due to his constant porn pirate chasing, the sender decided to locate the e-mail address of Mr. Steele's partner, Paul Hansmeier: prhansmeier@gmail_com(the sender found it in the source code for wefightpiracy_com)
The original message was resent along with the following post script:
The above scenario concerns me because it appears as though your firm is only interested in extracting settlements from as many people as humanly possible rather than attempting to accurately locate and prosecute individuals involved in digital piracy. Your firm seems disinterested in the details such as whether or not you have contacted someone already or that seemingly petty issue of whether or not they are innocent. I have discussed this individual with Mr. Steele before, and he told me that if this individual claims to want to go to trial than your client believes he is bluffing. In another on-line correspondence, Mr. Steele stated that your data collection methods may be flawed but people get convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time so there is no need to worry about potentially inaccurate data. It's as though your firm wants to do everything it can, including shifting back settlement deadlines, in order to avoid judicial scrutiny. I will continue monitoring this situation by maintaining copies of this individual's phone records, e-mails, and also intend to obtain the necessary equipment to record all the calls coming from your office.
The type of response that one would expect from a respectable law firm:
We apologize, there must have been a mix up with the e-mail addresses we sent the letter to. Please tell the recipient to ignore the message, but to be aware that we intend to continue moving forward with litigation( or some variation of the same message)
Instead, there was a prompt response from Mr. Steele's wefightpiracy_com e-mail address that looked rushed(a few obvious typos) and demanded to know what role the original sender has in this litigation.(Looks like Mr. Hansmeier may be trying to be the silent partner)
The sender explained to Mr. Steele, that he was acting on behalf of several John Does who have requested assistance with learning more about Mr. Steele's firm before making a decision about settling. The Does in question stand by their innocence and consist mostly of scared parents, scared teenagers/grandchildren, computer noobs, people with unsecured wi-fi, senior citizens with little to no computer knowledge etc.
The original sender stated that he was trying to ask extremely relevant questions about Mr. Steele's firm's practices such as:
1)Do your deadlines mean anything?
2)Why no payment plans if a deadline can change?
3)Do you maintain records of who you contact, when you contact them, and how often you contact them?
4)Are you ignoring people's refusals to settle and resending letters because you are only interested in settlements?
5) What terms does your client use to identify its copyrighted videos?(many of the videos Mr. Steele is trying to "blackmail" people over are technically not copyrighted yet. His complaints state that the videos have applications pending before the copyright office)
The original sender also explained that the Does involved are financially struggling to obtain legal counsel in their respective states.
Looks like Mr. Steele doesn't like it when people ask the right questions, as his final response was that he will not discuss other people's cases with someone who contacts him anonymously supposedly on their behalf. He said that the Does should contact his office directly or they should hire an attorney(I guess he missed the part where the sender told him they can't afford one).
Typical lawyer spin, as the way the messages were worded they did not request any information about a specific individual's case. All the planned questions were general questions about his practice and the above scenario merely served as an intro to the points that followed. The source above was referred to only as "an individual in another state"
So it looks like Mr. Steele will never answer questions from non-attorneys or anyone who chooses to remain Anonymous
I don't think he realizes the potential problems that can arise when there is one of him and tens of thousands of Anonymous web users who are keeping an eye on his firm, especially when it's obvious he his losing track of most of his online interactionsRecent evidence indicates that copyright troll John Steele, of wefightpiracy aka... more
-
-
(Digiprotect, a German Copyright Trolling company,admitted to intentionally uploading copyrighted material to Bittorrent in order to catch(entrap) infringers, so a frame job is a real possibility
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090831/0250256053.shtml)
Hard Drive Productions, the owners of Amatuer Allure, is currently a client of copyright troll John Steele. The company is using his services to attempt to demand thousands of dollars out of unsuspecting internet users for allegedly downloading one of their movies via Bittorrent. Since the company is supposedly taking a stand against porn piracy, I was shocked to come across a link on their main website that guides people to free adult content.
The link, screen captured in the included image, is still live at the time of this post. However, for some reason, there does not appear to be a direct link to the site on the company's page. Rather, I had to check the files on the server to find it
Highlights from the page(in case it goes down):
Sinpub Free Porn link in the lower left corner has been manually reset to redirect back to the Amateur Allure's adult link exchange. Sinpub recently changed its name to Wankerhut and contains streaming videos that max out at a length of 7 min 30 sec
The Free Bukkake tube link used to go to xget. Xget suddenly changed from being an adult content site that allowed one to watch and download free streaming content to a site that apparently points to checkdent.com. So it went from providing free full length videos, to a site about dentists
The Free B Amateurs link appears to be for an incomplete website. The page is filled with listings for "Test url blah blah blah"
The Free porn videos link towards the middle of the page links to sex2ube, which is a video sharing website that allows people to upload and download entire movies. Not sure why a company involved in copyright trolling would want to direct people to a video sharing site.
Lastly, the All Amateur Blog link is still active and contains a massive list of free full length video sites at the bottom.
If one follows any of the "friendly links" on the All Amateur Blog link one can find an endless supply of free full length streaming, though potentially copyrighted, adult content. I am attempting to determine why a company involved with the likes of copyright troll John Steele maintains an "adult link exchange". Isn't the whole point of the copyright troll's campaign to destroy the free porn market? Or is he merely interested in calling up random companies, offering his services for free, and then blackmailing as many people as humanly possible?
Hopefully this article doesn't get killed by Mr. Steele's clients(it would be the 4th to be flagged to death) because I sincerely believe the link in the image is something both the judge and jury for Mr. Steele's case would find to be very intriguing.(Digiprotect, a German Copyright Trolling company,admitted to intentionally uploading... more
-
-
(Please see comment below for a detailed explanation as to why I restored the article)
(No pic. Can't trust a copyright troll. He has a current account BTW.)
For the last several months, copyright troll John Steele has been mailing out letters to unsuspecting internet users demanding sums of cash for allegedly downloading copyrighted pornography. Many of his targets have disputed his claims, some of whom include older individuals who have no idea what a torrent file is or what P2P means/how it works. He sends out letters that list a single file that was allegedly downloaded months ago and then threatens the reciepent with legal action if they are unwilling to settle for a sum of anywhere from $1,900 to $3,000+. He also tells his targets that he will add an extra charge if there is evidence that they have deleted files from the computer, which is their legal possession. He usually gives his targets a mere 7 days to come up with the cash and to decide whether or not to settle.
His clients are companies which are estimated to make a few million dollars a year distributing films. They claim that their declining sales are the result of rampant piracy. They appear to never consider the fact that there is a ridiculous amount of free porn(legally free BTW) and also large network sites that offer full access to thousands of videos for usually about $20 a month. For $20 you can download and store thousands of movies legally. How these studios came up with trying to charge $3,000 per alleged copyright infringement is beyond me(greed? manipulating the legal system to bypass basic supply and demand?). It seems as though they can't deal with the Netflix effect of not being able to compete so they feel justified in suing potentially innocent people so that they can take a "larger part of the pie" than demand for their content would allow.
In order to get guaranteed returns from lawsuits that involve thousands of "John Does", these companies and Mr. Steele are willing to accept the very real likelihood that they are threatening,harrassing, and attempting to blackmail innocent people who are probably the victims of viruses, backdoors, or hackers. The evidence Mr. Steele uses to threaten people with comes directly from software he paid to have developed. According to him there are no false positives. Could a person who paid for software to be made convince the programmers to fabricate evidence? Probably(purely hypothetical statement. Don't sue John.)
Best part is, he doesn't charge for his services. His clients pay him out of the money he extorts, or I guess according to him recovers, from his targets. These multi-million dollar companies get free legal representation, while scared poor people have to try to scrape money together for a lawyer.
I'm not trying to condone piracy, rather I am hoping that you can join me in banding together to prevent innocent people from being harassed by greedy companies and a copyright troll. There are thousands of pay sites to choose from, many of which offer great deals and frequent updates. They treat people with respect and are therefore successful.
If you happen to have an account with any of the companies involved in Mr. Steele's lawsuits I am asking that you join in a campaign for "troll-free" porn by canceling your membership. When you cancel, the site should offer a text box asking why you are leaving. Let these companies know that you will not stand for them considering computers noobs and old people collateral damage in their quest to fill their pockets. Respecting the general public, which is potentially your future customers, is essential to maintaining and growing a business. Trying to scare people into paying you money just because some lawyers(they happen to get to write their own rules and in Mr. Steele's case they get to make their own evidence) can exploit the legal system in a way which lets them legally commit "normal people" crimes(harassment, blackmail, perjury, etc.) is morally deplorable.
If you are a more traditional porn consumer, please make the commitment to boycott the DVDs and magazines of any company willing be Mr. Steele's client.
The courts are willing to allow Mr. Steele despicable tactics, however if his clients take a financial hit they will likely stop their witch hunt. Tell them you are against blackmailing moms, dads, grandparents, kids, and all other innocent people. Let them watch their bank accounts dwindle just like those belonging to the people they are unjustly targeting. If a porn company is willing to abuse innocent people, do your part and slowly bankrupt them in protest.
Below is a list of companies using Mr. Steele's services. Cancel as soon as you can(most sites will let you download films, so just get as much as you can and then tell them to leave innocent people alone). Will be updated as news of more letters being sent out by Mr. Steele's firm is posted on-line:
Hard Drive Productions LLC
www. amatuer allure .com
Light Speed Media
http://www.light speed girls.com/
First Time Video, LLC.
www.ftv girls. com
Show Mr. Steele that the public won't stand for harassment and blackmail just because the courts are willing to allow it. This is a free market economy and what the customers want is what needs to happen.
On a side note, if any adult films stars support protecting the rights of innocent people please join the campaign to stop these bottom feeder lawsuits
(Quick random math problem. Likely cost of developing a single basic pornographic film: $1500-$5000+ depending on the model. Potential return on a fully successful Mr. Steele lawsuit: $3000 per John Doe. Average number of John Does in a Mr. Steele case:1000. Potential return with successful threats : $3,000,000 over a single film. John claims it's not about the money. I call b.s.)
BTW, before anyone tries to call me a pirate: I have 3 active memberships at 3 very well known sites that have never utilized Mr. Steele's services. For roughly $60 a month I am legally accessing over 6,000 videos and will continue my support because these troll free companies refuse to abuse people
Lastly, if any webmasters who host free samples for paysites on legal TGP or video sites are seeing this, please delete any samples you are hosting for any of Mr. Steele's clients. Since there is so much free porn on the internet, most paysites have to rely on samples in order to get people to realize their site exists. Cut off the samples and Mr. Steele's clients will be forced to rely on their excellent PR skills to get porn consumers to visit. I suggest "we sue innocent people in order to compensate for the fact that some people simply aren't interested in our content" as a tagline. See that in the news and the customers will come pouring in(Please see comment below for a detailed explanation as to why I restored the... more
-
-
(No pic from the web because John would probably try to find the copyright owner and sue me)
The article discusses the porn copyright lawsuits that are being filed by John Steele of wefightpiracy .com Steele | Hansmeier PLLC. Mr. Steele is best known for his 1-800-DIVORCE ads and family law firm in Chicago. What I find interesting about the article is how it mentions that Steele and his partner spent $250,000 developing software to track illegal Bittorrent activity. He also assures people in the article that his software appears to be flawless as it has never had a false positive so far. I guess that this is just the digital age, but I find it strange how an attorney is being allowed to sue people based on data coming from software that he needs to work so he can get a return on his investment. Seems like a conflict of interest. Or rather, a blatant violation of due process. Mr. Steele does not charge for his services, which means he needs the software he paid to make to consistently produce evidence that will result in a payday. The accuracy of the evidence is irrelevant, since he and his employees maintain exclusive control over it.
The "evidence" he sends to people is a printout which lists one's IP address and ISP. The same evidence is what was placed into a spreadsheet and submitted to ISPs to get the mailing addresses of subscribers. One's IP address and ISP name is publicly available information, so the evidence he submitted is half verifiable and half potentially made up. I contacted him and requested the name of his software and explanation of how it works. He said he is not required to prove anything to anyone. I have a feeling he is using proprietary software so he can try to toss out trade secret arguments in hopes of avoiding an investigation into his spreadsheet producing software.
An IP address can be manipulated and/or hijacked but he does not want to explain whether or not his software takes that into consideration. Alot of bad software can end up on a person's computer when searching the web, especially free porn sites. So what we have is a guy using his custom unproven software to sue people for $3,000 or more dollars for allegedly downloading a single porn film. I'm not sure how he justifies that price, especially since a person could sign up for pay sites that offer full access to 1000s of videos for usually about $1 per day. I realize that porn studios are struggling, but suing people for choosing to watch your video over the plethora of free porn on the internet is no way to attract customers. If someone rips an entire site, that could justify the fine. However, if a person happens to come across one of your films, watches it, and then decides that the chance to get hundreds more videos just like it for $20 a month....you have a new customer. A ten second clip will never win a person over. (You might be losing members, but that is probably because a lot of people are struggling and a porn membership simply is not as important as the electric bill or food or water or rent.) Or, you can go with John Steele who can generate a list of IP addresses who he can demand thousands of dollars from. He said his software has never been wrong. Trust him, he's a lawyer
http://www.koreaherald.com/lifestyle/Detail.jsp?newsMLId=20101124000596
An individual disputing Mr. Steele's claim that his software has never had a false positive.(The use of flawless in the title should not be considered a direct quote.). He/she states that his mother is being falsely accused. In the above article, Mr. Steele even tries to joke about the possibility of a false positive: "“All you have to do is sue a priest who’s never owned a computer and this is a major PR problem,” he said. (the link to the article is directly above this so don't try to sue me John):
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/es6uw/my_mom_got_a_letter_from_an_attorney_today_about/
I would think that if the reddit article information is accurate, then threatening someone into paying you $3000 in order to make "evidence" from software you claim is flawless in terms of producing the desired result(guilty every time....I mean it always catches actual criminals[sarcasm in case someone needs clarification])(why pay $250k for it if it wasn't? You would lose money that way) disappear would mean you are committing blackmail. Of course, lawyers have their own rules sometimes.....
(One last important point I forgot to point out:
"
Steele said the porn industry is trying to avoid the highly publicized mistakes the music industry trade group, the Recording Industry Association of America, known as RIAA, made in its fight against piracy. Among other things, he said his firm’s software has so far had no “false positives” like those that gave the recording industry black eyes."[In my opinion, what he probably really means is that everyone has cracked under his threats so far.]
-from the fully cited KoreaHerald article
Take note of the fact that the article states that the RIAA's methods utilized for searching for pirates occasionally resulted in false accusations. The RIAA spent $58 million going after pirates and only made 2% back(http://gizmodo.com/#!5587306/the-riaa-spent-58-million-suing-file-sharers-got-2-back)
Mr. Steele and his partner spent about $250k in developing the software that is the basis for their evidence. They must have quite the programming team to be able to make flawless software for .004% of the cost of the RIAA's lengthy campaign)
I should point out that Mr. Steele's settlement letters tend to start out with "our agents noticed illegal activity on an IP address associated with you(not exact quote since there might be a copyright on the letter)." Our agents is the equivalent of saying our employees. People he pays to find evidence for him, have apparently never made a mistake so far. Mr. Steele even includes an assumption of guilt towards the bottom: "While it is too late to undo the illegal file sharing associated with your IP address, we have prepared an offer to enable our client to allow both parties to avoid the expense of a lawsuit."
Basically, we have a lawyer who is saying you are guilty because my employees say you are, so pay me or else
In the comment section below are some links and information about the tactics of Mr. Steele and other attorneys engaged in mass letter "blackmail" campaigns. Before anyone decides to settle, I recommend reading some of it. Unfortunately, there are lawyers looking for a quick pay day on both sides of many cases so informing oneself is often times the best route. The courts seem to be protecting Mr. Steele and his extremely questionable methods, so I sincerely suggest requesting a jury trial if you have the means. Despite Mr. Steele's client demanding one in one of his complaints, Mr. Steele would have quite the uphill battle arguing any of these cases based on merit
Lastly, it is worth mentioning that Mr. Steele files the exact same complaint every time. I just reviewed Lightspeed Media Corporation v. Does and the wording and formatting is identical to Hard Drive Productions v. Does. He uses a form settlement letter and a form complaint, and then tries to pretend like he isn't just fishing for cas h
NOTE1: Anyone can PM me anytime if you would like some suggestions as to how to address issues with Mr. Steele.
NOTE2: New John Steele address:
Prenda Law Inc.------------Prenda Law of Chicago---Steele Law(John's divorce firm)
1111 Lincoln Rd----------- 161 N Clark St.-------------161 N Clark St.
Suite 400---------------------Suite 3200------------------Suite 3200
Miami Beach-----------------Chicago-----------------------Chicago
33139-------------------------60601-------------------------60601
Phone: 305-748-2102-----Ph.:312-880-9160-----------Ph.:312-893-5888(No pic from the web because John would probably try to find the copyright owner and... more
-
-
Being a citizen journalist is getting really scary, with copyright trolls lurking in the dark.
One of the worst is the wrongly named Righthaven, run by online jackal Steve Gibson.
“I’ve been a political journalist and blogger for over a year”, says Brian Hill (right) from Mayodan, North Carolina, in an email.
Brian 20, is one of Gibson’s latest victims.
He runs USWGO Alternative Newsn (ref: http://uswgo.com/). a non-profit site “where I write my own articles and mirror others articles with links to the source (Sometimes include pictures) to educate people that certain political agendas are going on but that got me sued this time”, he says.
He carried a Denver Post picture of a Transportation Security Administration guy groping — and we do mean groping — a passenger.
The pic makes it look as though the agent is searching for buried treasure.
“A Transportation Security Administration agent performs an enhanced pat down on a commuter at a security area at Denver International Airport in Denver, CO, November 17, 2010″, says the caption, attributing the photo to Craig F. Walker/ The Denver Post.
But neither one is going after Brian, who says he’s “mildly autistic”.
Rather, lowlife Gibson got his hands on the copyright and in one of the most egregious copyright troll cases yet, is suing Brian, who only found out about the suit when he was contacted by a reporter.
“Then I searched up my name and righthaven and found a court docket/filing verifying that this lawsuit against me over the TSA photo is real”, he told me.
Brian has posted the document on scribd. In it, Gibson says he could be “irreparably harmed”, demanding damages and costs.
Meanwhile, “Number of copyright Infringement Lawsuits Filed by Righthaven, as of February 2, 231 says Righthaven Lawsuits, going on:
Estimated Total Money Settlements Righthaven’s Efforts Have Earned to Date: $318,500 (based on 91 cases closed as of January 25, 2011 and an educated guesstimate of an average of $3,500 settled per case)”
Righthaven LLC “is owned 50/50 by two limited liability companies”, says Righthaven Lawsuits, adding >>>
The first is Net Sortie Systems, LLC, which is owned by Las Vegas attorney Steven Gibson (right) – the Nevada attorney who is behind all of the lawsuits filed by Righthaven. The second is SI Content Monitor LLC, which is owned by family members of investment banking billionaire Warren Stephens whose investments include Stephens Media, LLC which owns the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
While Righthaven owes its origins to Stephens Media, Righthaven recently picked up another media company client interested in pursuing the same type of copyright enforcement efforts on its behalf — WEHCO Media (which owns several weekly and daily publications including the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and Chattanooga Times Free Press, but also has a partnership with Stephens Media regarding WEHCO’s Northwest Arkansas publications). News coverage of Righthaven’s new “client” here, here, here, and here.
While no lawsuits have yet been filed by Righthaven on behalf of WEHCO Media, a third media company – Media News Group – is also using Righthaven’s “services” – as reflected by numerous copyright infringement lawsuits that have been filed by Righthaven in the Colorado over material appearing in the Denver Post, which is owned by Media News Group. News coverage of Righthaven’s Colorado “client” can be found here and here (see also Denver Posts’ “Notice to readers about Denver Post copyright protections” on November 14, 2010).
Will Gibson get away with this legal extortion? Or will someone, somewhere, pick up the case for Brian and make sure Gibson gets what he deserves?
Stay tuned.Being a citizen journalist is getting really scary, with copyright trolls lurking in... more
-
-
Three weeks ago the US Government seized 82 domains as part of Operation in Our Sites 2. The authorities claimed that the actions were targeted at websites that were involved in the illegal sale and distribution of counterfeit and copyrighted goods. However, the seizure application that was made public today suggests that the seizure of the BitTorrent meta-search engine Torrent-Finder rested on painful mistakes.
The seizure of 82 domain names by The Department of Justice (DOJ) and Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was making headlines across the Internet in November. In particular, the seizure of the BitTorrent meta-search engine Torrent-Finder was seen as a particularly controversial move.
Torrent-Finder’s owner Waleed Gadelkareem was genuinely surprised by the actions of the US authorities and said earlier that he is determined to fight the seizure. He suspected that the authorities had made a mistake and hired a lawyer to help him with the legal proceedings.
Torrent-Finder’s lawyer David Snead called the seizure “a stretch of the law,” and today it became apparent just how far the law was stretched by the authorities. The application for the seizure warrant was just sent to us by Torrent-Finder’s owner and on first reading several painful mistakes stand out.
To start off the affidavit shows that the authorities worked closely with the MPAA, and the movie industry lobby group is cited multiple times to confirm various claims. In addition, a highly disputed MPAA study is used to signify the severity of movie piracy, despite the fact that it was called into doubt by the Government Accountability Office just a few months ago.
The general description of Torrent-Finder and the four music linking sites that were included in the affidavit are not completely accurate either. The sites are described by Homeland Security’s Special Agent Reynolds as being among the most popular of their kind, but in the case of Torrent-Finder.com we can easily list a few dozen BitTorrent sites that have more visitors.
> This investigation has identified five linking, cyberlocker or Bit torrent websites that
> are among the most popular such websites on the internet for distributing illegal
> copies of movies, television shows, software and music files.
Aside from the fact that describing the site as one of the most popular of its type is a bit misleading, the core issue is whether Torrent-Finder is indeed a site which use is to distribute illegal copies of movies and music.
To make his case, agent Reynolds characterizes Torrent-Finder as a linking site, which generally “collect and catalog links to files on third party sites that contain illegal copies of copyrighted content, including movies, television shows, software and music.” This description doesn’t really seem to apply to Torrent-Finder.com.
Torrent-Finder does not catalog or collect any files, it simply allows people to search several torrent search engines or indexes. Also, these other torrent search engines do not host any copyrighted material either, but only torrent files that may or may not point to copyrighted content.
Another claim from Homeland Security’s Special Agent Reynolds is that the news section on the site was another indication that Torrent-Finder was aiding criminal copyright infringement. He describes it as follows:
> I was able to view posts by the user “Torrent Finder,” including “Top 10 Most Pirated
> Movies on BitTorrent,” “Piracy in The Music Industry,” “The First Episode of ‘The The
> Walking Dead’ Leaks to BitTorrent,” and “Piracy domain seizure bill gains support.”
This is interesting to say the least, because all these articles from the news section are in fact copies from articles that came from TorrentFreak and other sites. Torrent-Finder used our site as a news source and shared the articles with the users of the site.
> From reviewing these posts by the user “Torrent Finder,” I learned that the above -
> referenced postings contained links and information to pirated movies including
> “Wall Street Never Sleeps,” “The Social Network,” “Red,” and other movies.
This appears to be another painful mistake. Not only have two of the four articles nothing to do with pirated content, the ones that do are news items that do not link to torrent files or any copyrighted files. A screenshot copy of our “Top 10 Most Pirated Movies on BitTorrent” article is nevertheless included as evidence in the affidavit.
Ironically, the “Piracy domain seizure bill gains support” article comes from CNET and covers the COICA law that would grant US authorities the power to seizure domains, in a similar fashion to what they did with Torrent-Finder.
The seizure application then continues to describe how the Torrent-Finder site works, and the “Downloads of Infringing Content via Torrent-Finder.com” is particularly interesting. Here, Special Agent Reynolds described how the site can be used to download torrent files from external sites.
Although the description itself is fairly accurate, the same section would also apply to every other search engine including Google and Bing. Downloading torrents via Torrent-Finder involves exactly the same steps as downloading torrents via a web search engine, nothing more nothing less.
Another part of the affidavit that stands out is the fact that the proposed seizure has not been carried out properly. According to the affidavit, the authorities should present the warrant to both the registrar (Godaddy) and the registry (Verisign). The registrar would then have to replace the domain name’s technical and administrative contacts with that of the authorities, but this never happened.
Although we’re not legal experts, in our opinion there were enough mistakes made in the affidavit to warrant an appeal against the seizure and get the domain transferred back to the original owner. In order to achieve this, Torrent-Finder’s owner is willing to put up a fight.
“My concern now is to get back my domain. Not because I do business with it, but because it was the first domain I bought and the first idea that I developed. It has been mine since then and I WILL NOT give it away because the USA government is testing a new bill,” Waleed said, referring to the COICA bill that would make such domain seizures standard procedure.
In the coming days Waleed and his lawyer will consider what steps to take next, and we expect that this will not be the last time we report on this unique case.Three weeks ago the US Government seized 82 domains as part of Operation in Our Sites... more
-
-
Three LimeWire alternatives for easy peer-to-peer downloading
by Lee Mathews on November 1, 2010 at 10:30 AM
To the average downloading public, the recent news about LimeWire being forced to shut down sounds pretty ominous. At my day job, I've already been asked "How do I download songs now?" While LimeWire shutting down is bad news for its users, there's a silver lining to this cloud.
* The Gnutella network did not get shut down -- the actual songs you were downloading came from the Gnutella network, not directly from LimeWire. LimeWire merely found the songs on the network and then downloaded them.
* LimeWire is open source software -- this means any developer with the know-how could download the LimeWire program code and modify it and release his or her own version of LimeWire.
So, how do you download songs now? Easy -- just replace LimeWire with an alternative program which can download from the Gnutella network and you're good to go!
Frostwire
In case you didn't guess from the name, FrostWire is about as close as you can get to the original LimeWire experience. The program is pretty much LimeWire minus some of the annoyances -- like the "upgrade to pro" nag screens. Some Gnutella programs don't compare to LimeWire for searching or download speed, but FrostWire is one of the best -- which makes sense, since it's built on the same source code.
As a bonus, FrostWire is also available for your Android phone -- check out Sebastian's post for more details!
Watch out for the Ask toolbar during install -- just uncheck all the boxes if you don't want it.
Cabos
We've written about Cabos in the past, and it might be exactly what you were hoping LimeWire would be in the first place. Cabos is small, fast, good at searching, and offers excellent download speeds. Installing Cabos is a breeze -- there's no toolbar to watch for and no lengthy "set up your sharing options" wizard to trudge through.
MP3 Rocket
MP3 Rocket also looks a lot like LimeWire and works the same way, so it's another good option. It's a lot like FrostWire, too, though MP3 Rocket does offer you a pro version and screens will pop up from time to time asking you to upgrade.
During install, MP3 Rocket offers the Ask toolbar -- make sure to uncheck all the boxes if you don't want it. You'll also be asked for your email address, but you don't have to provide it -- just click next to skip ahead.Three LimeWire alternatives for easy peer-to-peer downloading
by Lee Mathews on... more
-
-
A group led by former Pirate Bay co-founder Peter Sunde is forming to develop a peer-to-peer-based alternative to today's ICANN-controlled DNS system, according to a blog posted on Tuesday. A tweet on Sunde's account dated Nov 28 said: "Alternative dns root is step 1. Step 2 is the new DNS system that is in the making. It's not advanced, it's p2p and more secure." The tweet generated a fair amount of interest according to Sunde and he has posted a follow up post on a blog called "P2P DNS" stating:
"We haven't organized yet, but trying to. The background for this project is that we want the internet to be uncensored! Having a centralised system thatcontrols our information flow is not acceptable.
By using existing technology for de-centralisation together with already having a crew with skilled programmers, communicators and network specialists, an alternative system is not far away. We're not going to re-invent the wheel, we're going to build on existing technology as much as possible.
There will be a press release shortly with more details."A group led by former Pirate Bay co-founder Peter Sunde is forming to develop a... more
-
-
Limewire, one of the world's biggest file-sharing websites, has been shut down by a US judge after a four-year legal battle.
In a huge victory for the record industry, New York District Judge Kimba Wood issued a permanent injunction, ordering the service to stop supplying its software and to block the sharing of unauthorised files.
The 17-page ruling requires LimeWire to 'disable the searching, downloading, uploading, file trading and/or file distribution functionality, and/or all functionality of the software.'
The decision puts an end to one of the world's biggest services for allowing consumers to share music, movies and TV shows for free over the internet.
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which filed the copyright complaint against Lime Wire and its founder Mark Gorton in 2007, will now seek damages that could easily top $1billion.
RIAA lawyers told the judge that LimeWire cost the record labels about $500 million a month in lost revenue by helping users swop more than 3 billion songs a month.
They claimed Limewire's software had been downloaded from the pirates' site more than 200 million times, and 98.8 per cent of download requests were for unauthorised files.
They described Limewire's actions as "rampant" copyright infringement on a "massive scale".
LimeWire has said it has more than 50 million monthly users. These users accounted for 58 percent of people who said they downloaded music from a peer-to-peer service in 2009, a survey by NPD Group showed.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1324487/LimeWire-shut-Victory-record-industry-U-S-court-closes-file-sharing-site.html#ixzz13epJ3qiiLimewire, one of the world's biggest file-sharing websites, has been shut down by... more
-
-
Federal judge Rosemary Collyer sits on the DC District Court, where several of the recent US Copyright Group lawsuits against alleged P2P users have been filed. A few of those lawsuits ended up on Judge Collyer's calendar, one of them filed against over 4,000 anonymous "John Does" at once.
This week, Judge Collyer issued a terse demand to the lawyers behind these cases: convince me within two weeks that jamming 4,577 people into a single lawsuit is a proper use of the court system.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/06/judge-may-dismiss-4576-of-4577-p2p-defendants-from-lawsuit.arsFederal judge Rosemary Collyer sits on the DC District Court, where several of the... more
-
-
No, it's not what you think: a swash-buckling extra-legal pirate hunter with a musket, a clipper ship and letters of mark stalking the coasts of Somalia. It's about copyright piracy. And it's kind of sinister.
The British Secretary of State is proposing legislation that would give his position the ability to create anti-piracy legislation without Parliamentary debate. The goal is to crack down on copyright infringement in a big way.
Cory Doctorow at Boing-Boing broke the story:
This is as bad as I've ever seen, folks. It's a declaration of war by the entertainment industry and their captured regulators against the principles of free speech, privacy, freedom of assembly, the presumption of innocence, and competition.
This proposal creates the office of Pirate-Finder General, with unlimited power to appoint militias who are above the law, who can pry into every corner of your life, who can disconnect you from your family, job, education and government, who can fine you or put you in jail.
This comes as some see the music industry starting to recover from a hard decade of battling piracy. The Economist wrote last week that though sales across the industry are down a third, the music business is adapting successfully. And moving beyond suing the pants of off random downloaders. Viacom's chief counsel told a group of Yale law students that suing P2P users "felt like terrorism".
Well it certainly seems like the Brits are gearing up for the sort of extralegal powers we're used to over here with our War on Terror. ...But...wait...that's backward...the terrorists are....the lawyers? Ah, somebody'll figure it out.
Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Why 14.6% of America can't afford enough food - Real Recovery
- The last Supreme Leader of Iran
- Problems facing California prisons: Cell phones
- US, China to work on clean energy - No bill this year
- Did airport slaughter scene get Modern Warfare 2 banned in Russia?No, it's not what you think: a swash-buckling extra-legal pirate hunter with a... more
-
