Copyright troll John Steele uses "flawless" software he paid $250k to create in order to generate evidence to sue 1000s in Torrent lawsuits

To be fair though, that article is over a year old and there have been a lot of developments in troll cases since that was published. If one does a decent amount of research and plans out a motion to quash that cites other judge's decisions there is a decent chance it will suceed. Just because they failed then does not mean they will fail now. Especially since each person's defense tends to be different

A motion to quash can slow the process down a little, since his firm is obligated to respond to each one. Also, one can file a motion to quash as just an IP address in order to avoid revealing one's identity. However, if there are a ton of Does in the case, then a wait-and-see approach is the best option for now.

Steele, Duffy, or whoever (Steele is still the puppetmaster) just filed suits against individual Does. Simply due to the fact that the owner of the IP in the original complaint boneheadedly called Steele and told him that someone else did it so the new complaints actually state the name of the owner of the IP in the original complaint and then they're trying to go after whoever actually downloaded the file too. Two for the price of one. Lesson: don't feed the trolls.

Luckily, in an actual lawsuit they won't be able to pursue both people unless they manage to show that the owner approved of the downloader's activity. I can understand some people feeling the need to turn others in especially in situations where a roomate downloaded the file using the account holder's IP.

If "more" does not refer to the same company or one of Mr. Steele's other clients, do not bring it up. He has no right or reason to inquire about other companies. Never settle at a lawyer's intial asking price, as it can always be driven down. If you allow him to know that you can afford $3400, he will refuse to negotiate. Also, if the suit was filed in a different state you may fall outside of the court's jurisdiction and have nothing to worry about until he manages to hire a partner in your state. For now, don't take this wrong, but delete those two comments and send me a private message with more details if you would like specific advice. I suggest deleting them because I found your Facebook page, and a skilled lawyer could use use it as a means to locate you. Plus, Mr. Steele used to visit this page occassionally. If you scroll way down, he popped up on here when I first wrote this(I'm positive it is really him)

BTW, that Florida lawyer is probably just looking for a quick settlement so I would disregard the comment unless more is the same company

You're actually admitting, in public, that you've committed more acts of copyright infringement than what you've been charged with committing? Seriously?

Your first mistake was calling them

He hasn't passed anything to Duffy. Prenda Law still operates out of Steele's "old" office on Clark St. in Chicago and now in Steele's NEW office in Miami Beach. The new settlement letters from Prenda (fightcopyrighttrolls) tell you to send your money to the Miami Beach address. You are right, however, that Steele's name has become toxic and he proxied his suits to Duffy because he was becoming notorious. Funny thing, Duffy filed 3 suits on the 21st and one of them was assigned to Judge Milton Shadur (the Judge who ripped Steele a new one) and Duffy IMMEDIATELY dismissed the case.

You can't be held in contempt of court for not responding to an out of court settlement letter. I'm no lawyer, but threats like "if you do not pay our settlement, you will be held in contempt" are at the very least a violation of ethics and at the very most illegal. If you're not gonna settle, shred the letter. Do not respond and try your best to avoid ALL contact with these clowns, even though it's kinda hard if you don't know what number they're calling people from. Please disregard if you've been paid a visit by a process server (named as a defendant...which he has NEVER done to anyone in one of these lawsuits).

Thanks for the reply... I am preparing a motion to quash - don't care if it is successful or not - but just need to do something to fight this crap... I can't believe this is allowed to happen - and I NEVER answer my phones if I don't know who it is.... the beauty of caller ID I guess! Thanks again.

If you happen to pick up by mistake, you can just tell them that your lawyer will be in touch. At that point, they are obligated to leave you alone(at least for awhile)

Beware, a motion to quash will be unsuccessful for the simple reason that you're technically not a party to the lawsuit and therefore have no legal standing in the matter. That being said, a motion to quash will put you on Steele's radar. It'll piss him off because you're actually questioning him and he HATES being questioned. I'd be opening myself up to a MASSIVE libel suit, which I have zero doubt Steele would take advantage of, if I actually posted what I actually think of him on here or anywhere else.

I can't believe their settlement letter contained a threat to hold you in contempt if you don't contact them. Save ALL communication with those idiots, and they are truly idiots because Mark Lutz is wanted in the State of Wisconsin on a Kenosha County bench warrant. When they call, record the voicemails with a digital recorder or whatever's handy like your phone (Mark Lutz's calls came up as some "Scholarships" number with a 312 prefix). Save the settlement letters, hell, I'd suggest signing up for a PACER account so you can track the progress of the suit. Steele will tell the judge he's gonna serve defendants, but he won't. He never will. The only possible way that you will end up named individually is if you actually correspond with one of those puds and tell them "hey, it wasn't me who did this" because they don't care (look up some of the Hard Drive Productions v. Doe cases just filed). They'll go after you individually and they'll go after whoever you tell them you think did it. My advice, clam up and don't paint a bullseye on your back.

He actually is starting to name individuals. If you check out Prenda's new site, they have about 25 names listed. Things have changed a bit lately, and the risk has become substantially greater for those who do not respond at all. Based on the policies put forth by Steele/Prenda's man in California, Brett Gibbs, a failure to respond will result in a request to inspect your computer. If one's positive one is innocent, that won't be a problem. However, if a relative is responsible(especially a minor) and traces of the file are found then one will be left with no other choice but to either settle or implicate one's relative. Totally dodging them and then having the file found on your PC will make you look extremely guilty in the eyes of the judge. A well written motion to quash, or simply a letter stating one's case, can actually help to inform judges about the true nature of these cases. There is a risk involved with contacting the court, however if you're positive you didn't do it then you're better off at least trying. If your connection was simply hijacked, then the file will not show up on your PC and you have nothing to worry about. The Prenda team is not the brightest, so standing your ground and fighting back is more likely to protect your rights than a wait and see approach. BTW, Steele and Prenda have been in articles and on blogs enough to where libel suits will never be filed. The man is an attention whore and knows that he has lost the right to complain about people being mean to him

They're only naming individuals who called Steele/Duffy and told them "I didn't do this but I know who did..." They name those individuals (IP "owners") in a complaint and then ask for time for discovery to find the person who actually did download the file...and then they sue both of them. I will not go to Steele/Duffy's site because I know they collect IPs and then match them to their spreadsheet of victims. I'll fight back if needed, but right now I don't feel like I need to because I don't feel threatened at all.

True. However, based on the complaints written by Brett Gibbs, if one contacts them and fails to provide an adequate defense then they will be named. So far they have focused on the individuals who are willing to implicate others, however that doesn't necessarily mean that they are not willing to investigate if necessary. They have taken and inspected people's computers before but those actions are just not well publicized. If you want to check out the new Prenda site just use a free web based proxy

$3400? Looks like he has gone up on his settlement price. You should look up your case number online and check whether or not the case was filed in your state. If not, then all you have to worry about is telling John and his team off over the phone a couple times. To give you completely accurate info though, I would need to know the case number and the number of Does. You can PM me if you'd prefer to keep the details private

Yes, you should keep this and make it available to everyone, this is how we can fight the trolls, by accessing to this type of information and realizing that what they're doing is just a scam.

Read this article, it's another setback for steele.

http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com/2011/10/21/another-victory-in-virginia/

this business model to become rich at the expense of innocent people will not last long..

http://fightcopyrighttrolls.com

If Wordpress format works for you, and you want to publish any pages on fightcopyrighttrolls.com, I will be happy to give you the admin access.

By the way, Steele appeared in the comments section of the "Trolls in panic..." listed below.

Cheers,

SJD

You've got my vote. I'd love for more people to be able to read about the "proprietary" software someone has used to extract hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars out of people.

Haven't read the entire amicus yet since I kind of froze up when I got to page 5. How can Steele Hansmeier claim that they had a case in which one invidual was associated with 28 IP addresses? They can't even figure out which computer was used to download a file but they managed to trace 28, likely proxies if it's even true, back to one guy? I call b.s. and will look into it more

Looked up the IP address list and while I hate to admit it, that's a valid argument. However it is only valid when dealing with Does who have dynamic IP addresses. Steele Hansmeier is being melodramitic though by claiming they would have to file 28 seperate lawsuits. All they would have to do is get one of the 28, find out how often the Doe's IP changed, request that list, cross-reference it with your main list of all the does, and then cross out the duplicates. But, they are simply too lazy and incompetent to do so

It is an excellent article. Mr. Ranallo does very good work

So do you know him, or his work.. ? please tell..

I don't know him personally, however I do know that he is one of the only lawyers I have seen who appears to be genuinely interested in taking out copyright trolls.

Maybe not a tech background, but from what I've read, the Hansmeier brothers do have a background in computer crimes. What I find the most amusing is that Steele-Hansmeier declares this software as "flawless." No software is flawless, all software has bugs. If software engineers for Google or Microsoft can't write bug-free software, why should anyone believe that one or both of the Hansmeier brothers can? If they can write flawless code, then they should be making seven figures. These judges need to wise up when it comes to tech, because IP/MAC spoofing is not just proof-of-concept. It occurs, I just don't know how frequently because I've been out of the scene for quite some time.

I am trying to look into the limitations of their tracking software some more, however for now I can say that it seems pretty obvious that they do not record mac addresses. I came to that conclusion after reading the story about the grandfather who was accused by Steele Hansmeier but was told that they do not know which computer was used to download the file. Brett Gibbs, the California lawyer for Steele Hansmeier, directly told the judge that he would have to search every computer in the house. That is an extremely important limitation, especially when it comes to people with open wi-fi.

Thanks! . Many people have said all along that an IP address is insufficient, and it's good to see judges taking note. It is extremely curious that their demand letters still say that you are guilty regardless. It does appear that they may have just copied the letter from another website, so maybe the other website just hasn't updated recently :)

Do you know for sure how Paul and Peter Hansmeier are related? I said brothers, but that was a guess. Could just be a coincidence.

I know for sure that they are brothers. Their dad is also an attorney. I have a ton of comments on here, but if you scroll down for awhile you will see the picture of both of them. Based on what I've read, the Hansmeier brothers and John Steele all went to the same college

Best part is, despite the fact it was Brett Gibbs in California who made the comment Mr. Steele will not be able to escape it. Mr. Gibbs works for Mr. Steele and is handling the exact same type of cases, therefore logically his conclusion carries over to all the cases being handled by wefightpiracy/Steele Hansmeier

Gibbs just torpedoed every single one of Steele's cases with that statement in open court. "IP addresses do not identify individuals...I know, I told you they do under penalty of perjury, but I just found out that they don't...sorry. Pretty please let me send a forensic team to the defendant's house so I can possibly, maybe find out who really did what I'm accusing them of doing." This crap will not fly for much longer and judges are obviously wising up to Steele's tactics, which makes me wonder how long he'll keep this up until he either cuts and runs or gets sanctioned or (even better) disbarred.

On a side note, I just got a call from Lutz telling me how fortunate I am because the plaintiff is willing to extend my settlement date (they're just looking out for me, right?) and that, since the office has been "so busy" (with filing frivolous lawsuits), they haven't had the time to...oh hell, I wasn't even really listening to the voicemail. I was laughing while recording it because he obviously thinks that I have an IQ of 75 and don't know when I'm being lied to.

They tend to do that as I know of one case in which they kept extending a guy's deadline even though he told them to sue. They kept pushing it back for 9 months and then suddenly voluntarily dropped the case. Hopefully they aren't calling you too often

Pretty sure that order is going to eventually kill all of his cases. Have a feeling Mr. Gibbs will be looking for a new job soon

I agree! If that court's ruling is good law, Steele's other cases don't stand a prayer. All he knows from his allegedly "flawless" software is the IP address of someone who might have a chunk of a file available for downloading via Bittorrent. If that information is not sufficient to start his lawsuits, how could any of them be successful? I hope he gets hit with sanctions for bringing frivolous lawsuits. He had better go back to divorce cases and be glad he did manage to extort some money from defendants who settled.

Looks like the guy was the original uploader on six Corbin Fisher films, which are the property of Liberty Media Holdings. According to the plaintiff's lawyer he will only pay $25,000 if he agrees to never upload the company's movies again. The settlement includes a clause that allows the defendant to reduce the amount owed so long as he stops sharing files and makes monthly payments towards the fine:

http://torrentfreak.com/biggest-ever-bittorrent-piracy-settlement-is-intriguing-...
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/01/gay-porns-p2p-amnesty-cough-up-1000-and-you-wont-be-sued.ars

I'm not sure how I feel about that settlement amount. Since it is six films, you are looking at about $40k per film. He was the original uploader on the files, so he was definitely guilty and had no choice but to settle. However, I question how the company calculated the supposed $500,000 in damages especially since a lost sale doesn't count if a person wouldn't be willing to pay for it. Yet, at the same time I kinda respect Mr. Randazza's willingness to offer a good behavior clause

Apparently in the letter to the grandma letting her off:

"Regarding the San Francisco article, publicity about our efforts are always welcome as it deters infringers," read the letter signed by Steele. "Also, a movie producer hired our firm after reading the article and for that I thank you."

Always with the antagonism and snide remarks, this guy.

Well, first of all, (as far as I know) there is absolutely no possible way to tell who shared what with whom. As was previously stated, the entire work must be shared for there to be infringement, not a tiny piece of it.

A PUBLIC tracker(s), nonetheless. One that's in located in SWEDEN (that's where thepiratebay.org is located, if I'm not mistaken). I'd LOVE to see him subpoena TPB and all of the other public trackers for their "logs." TPB has managed to fend off the Swedish government, numerous DMCA complaints and still goes on its merry way, so dealing with a divorce lawyer from Chicago, err, Miami Beach, should be like picking up drunk chicks. He probably just used uTorrent with logging. That's some real expensive software...I paid, uh, nothing for it (and I'm not a thief for doing so!). Clicked on the "Peers" tab and all he saw was a list of peers as he seeded (see: distributed) the file(s), took that list, whittled it down to those living in the U.S., sued them, found out he can't sue people in California for "copyright infringement" occurring in Illinois, then whittled down the list further. All of this crap, and more, are reasons why this would never fly in front of a jury.

Don't worry about the prick, he won't go that way, because if he sues anyone individually, a good lawyer will kick his ass in the court. And when he loses the case, he will pay for your attorney fees. All those low life lawyers using the same strategy, filing Doe cases in different states and shaking down for settlement money, that's it.

ya i saw they filed a smaller case in texas. 114 I think. But my lawyer was saying Steele told him he might sue a set of given IPs (my IP was one of the 4 he gave my lawyer). One person already settled. And apparently in San fran he did that before he sued. this is relating to First Time Videos.

I assume that Steele is only suing the Does in the initial cases to determine their identities. After determining their identities, I assume that he threatens to sue the named person, causing people with means to simply settle the case to avoid public embarrassment.

You can believe that if these cases related to anything other than porn, people would not be so quick to settle.

These lawsuits will cause people to stop using Bittorrent. Regardless of the merits of these cases, why subject yourself to the lawsuit risk when much of the same material being shared on Bittorent is also available for direct download from the various file storage websites and is readily searchable via the file tube websites?

When your ISP sends you a copy of the subpoena or, if you have A LOT of free time, look up every single lawsuit filed and cross-reference it with your IP address.

I have taken numerous law courses (including one in IP law), however I'm not a lawyer. That being said, I'm 99% sure he'd have to subpoena each ISP again if he filed individually. If you look at it, using the premise that he's actually gonna sue a couple hundred/thousand John Does in a reverse class action, filing the motions for expedited discovery, then just dropping the cases and filing individually...that reeks of misconduct. It'd be obvious to anyone with half a brain that he never meant to name said Does. Then to use the information gained through the previous subpoena to identify Does he wants to sue individually (whose names/IDs he would not otherwise have) would just be icing on the cake. He could cherry pick individual cases, based on research conducted by private investigators, to literally maximize return (anyone under a net worth of $x, leave alone...over net worth of $x, sue the hell outta them). Even if he could do that, the awards would be overturned on appeal.

Steele works out of Chicago and then, I'm pretty sure the torrent tracking is supposedly happening in Minnesota and is being handled by Paul and Peter Hansmeier, two brothers that lived privileged lives and who Steele met while attending college. I do not believe that Mr. Steele completely stopped practicing divorce law, however I'm pretty sure he realized sitting around writing letters and counting cash is a much more profitable venture than the respectable business of family law. As for Miami, Mr. Steele has started to hire other lawyers who are as equally scummy and lack any understanding of ethics(in my opinion at least) to mail out letters in different states. I believe the idea is to make the threat feel closer to home, despite the fact Mr. Steele case remains ridiculously weak

He filed an address change to Miami Beach. I really don't know how that all works, but I've got a good idea why. Florida's a porn goldmine, do the math.

I'm doing my best to look into it. However, if it helps, I just want to let you know that 4 months with no word is not necessarily a bad thing. I know of cases in which Mr. Steele "lost contact" with individuals for over 8 months. If he keeps waiting, he is probably just trying to make you sweat and you should file an ethics complaint against him. Honestly kinda hoping he goes after this one guy, since the accused still holds a letter that will severely damage Mr. Steele's case and reputation if it's brought up in court. Lastly, one can argue that Mr. Steele is violating the federal rules of civil procedure due to the fact that some individuals(like the person with the letter) have directly told Mr. Steele to go ahead and sue but he keeps refusing to do so

Yeah I love it when he tells the press that people love the Non-Disclosure Agreements. What a load. Yeah people love not being able to warn people that they got bullied out of money and, upon further investigation, weren't ACTUALLY being sued... just threatened with the possibility of being named.

My friend gave in a while back, this was before I even knew about the situation. I feel bad that they caved.

Not sure, but try to get a recording of that if you can. Depending on his tone, not only could it serve as evidence of actionable professional misconduct but it could also convince judges that Mr. Steele is taunting people and/or treating this process like a game.

Did he indicate for how much he wants you to settle in his message?

It wasnt in a phone message. It was in an email. I guess I should have been clear.

Same as usual. 2900.

Try to keep a copy of that e-mail, since ethical lawyers are not supposed to engage in that sort of taunting and gamesmanship when discussing the possibility of a settlement. You may be able to argue that you have proof he was intentionally/maliciously screwing with you which not only weakens his case but can result in disbarment

His behavior, and all of the other attorneys acting on his behalf, borders on violation of FRCP Rule 11. He has absolutely no intention of naming anyone. Here's part of Rule 11:

"By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper — whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it — an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:

(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;"

All he does is delay cases. Some of these have been going on for almost a year without a single person being named. If he was actually serious about naming people, he wouldn't make phone calls, offer settlements, send letters...he'd just name them.

You're on target. Seeders and peers distribute blocks of data, not the whole file. So, unless the law covers parts of files (which I doubt) or Steele is the exclusive distributor of the file (impossible), there is no case.

Here's one problem: most of these films aren't copyrighted. There's an application for a copyright, but no actual copyright on file in Washington. Another issue is the method of collecting IP addresses. If Steele participated in the distribution of the material, then there's the "distributing pornography w/o age verification" catch. Then there's his "flawless software." Ask any computer nerd, no software is flawless. It's almost certain that his software has generated false positives. And finally, Judge Baker's opinion that stated that an IP address does not equate to a person. He cited the FBI's tactical team raiding a guy in Buffalo (?) for kiddie porn and it turned out to be the guy next door hijacking his wireless connection. If I were a lawyer (and I'm not), I wouldn't want any of these cases going near a judge or jury. An experienced lawyer familiar with IP law would have a field day with these cases. Public opinion seems to be leaning against Steele, especially after it went public that one of the Does in one of his suits is a 70 year old grandmother.

I get the vibe that the people who settle are scared to death of being named in a lawsuit involving porn (reputation), scared to death of legalese (i.e. receiving settlement letters, phone calls, reminder letters...basically legalized harassment), or just don't understand their rights. For the record, none of the cases have gone to trial, although the case most likely to go to trial (although no defendants have been served as far as I know) is Hard Drive Productions v. Does 1-1000 in the Northern District of IL. Even then, the majority of judges as of late have entered orders of protection or made it clear to Plaintiff's counsel that names are not to be made public. It just seems as though the judges allow expedited discovery, then Steele drags his feet (then is eviscerated by Judge Shadur).

I suspect that if someone did distribute a portion of a video file and that portion could be rendered on a media player to watch a snippet of a movie, that probably would constitute copyright infringement - the entire movie wouldn't need to be copied in that case. However, in the Bittorrent cases, as I understand it only a small portion of a data file is acquired from each individual entity in a Bittorrent "swarm." Maybe I am incorrect about this, but I don't think that a small 1kb data block can be rendered via a media player to view even a small portion of a video file, even if it is copyrighted. If this is true, then I really don't see how he has a case against individual Bittorrent users unless he can somehow establish that a sufficiently large data block was downloaded from a specific user to render a portion of a video file - I seriously doubt that he has the ability to prove this. I would think that he would need to collectively sue every person from whom data was downloaded under a theory of contributory copyright infringement in order to download an entire video file - this would also be problematic for Steele because he almost certainly wouldn't know which data blocks came from which persons, especially if there are hundreds of thousands of data blocks in a video file.

I thought that Hard Drive Productions v. Does 1-1000 was tossed out. Did Steele refile that case?

You have a point that people will settle. If someone is a professional or makes six figures a year such that a $3-4k settlement is not overly burdensome, that person probably would settle rather than deal with any negative publicity that might harm that person's professional standing.

It would be nice if a judge simply threw out Steele's Bittorrent lawsuits for lacking merit and hit him with sanctions for bringing a frivolous lawsuit. I suspect that if any of these cases actually did go to trial for copyright infringement, that would be the ultimate outcome.

Usually 2,900, supposedly 1 in 5 people settle. It's disturbingly lucrative. Though I guess the price has gone up according to the 70-year-old on all the news sites.

According to a Huffington Post article, settlements range from $3 to $12k. $12k seems especially outrageous for an out-of-court settlement for this type of copyright infringement.

I guess maybe we could assume those are people he knows have more money? I've never actually heard of that much being asked for during my own research.

Either that or maybe he had evidence of multiple files traded by the person who settled for $12k. That is scary for people who may have used Bittorent to download several different files around the same time/

This type of litigation shakedown is probably going to become much more common. It must be fairly easy for someone to locate a Bittorrent user's IP address and then go to court to compel the ISP to hand over that person's identity.

Why would anyone use Bittorent if they knew there was a good chance that they would get sued?

These litigation tactics won't stop file sharing, but people will use technologies other than Bittorrent. It is obvious that suing the end users is more about raising money than stopping piracy. I wonder whether the porn studios will make more from settlements than they do for sales of some of their movie titles? If Steele is handling this litigation/prelitigation on a contingent fee basis, he might be getting 30-40% of the proceeds from the settlements, so he has every incentive in the world to keep going into court to find potential defendants.

He launched one these extortion attempts at a friend of mine who isn't that good with technology and even less familiar with our messy legal system since she'd just immigrated to the U.S. I didn't know that much myself until I came across this site and was assisted and educated by the folks on this site, I've thanked them for the help but it's never enough they have been awesome. I read some post Mr. Steele put up somewhere a while back where he saw this very situation with an elderly person coming and what a PR disaster it would be but didn't seem to care. It looks like you don't need help the only thing I would advise is you file a written complaint with the attorney oversight folks where your grandmother lives. It seems this and other asshole lawyers have a cover in that they don't name anyone in a lawsuit since they'd actually have to go to court and prove what they're accusing folks of which I suspect is very expensive and a lot easier said than done.

A very significant comment from the TechDirt version of the article:

"What about me, Jul 24th, 2011 @ 5:51am
Pardon my ignorance. Most of you folks seem pretty well educated about this downloading stuff. I'm hoping I can ask a question without being attacked. I don't download music, movies, or pornography. I don't have a laptop. I don't even have internet service. I use the internet at the library, work (rarely), and sometimes from my friends computers. So if the way that Mr. Steele gets IP addresses is from his software and then the ISP gives them the name of the person using that IP address - why is this guy bothering me? If I don't have internet service how can I have an IP address? I don't have cable TV service. I don't even have a phone with internet access; so how could I have an IP address attached to my name? He can't just start calling and screaming at random people, even if they don't have internet service right? I don't even know how he got my contact information. And why does Mr. Steele have to call people names and make personal attacks? He seems very irrational and very unprofessional"

If more stories like this are made public, Mr. Steele's firm may have to shutter itself due to public outrage

Wow. This guy sure is a winner. I'm surprised a site would allow a review to be deleted... I thought that was the point of those review sites... Like wouldn't everyone delete their Negative Ebay reviews if they could??

After reading reports about Medical Justice impersonating satisfied customers on yelp, I started to realize that lawyers with enough cash can pull off anything to protect their reputation....or rather the people they hire can

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/05/medical-justice-caught-impersona...

No. As far as I am aware, none of the John Doe lawsuits have gone to trial despite Mr. Steele demanding a jury trial in every one of his filings. I suspect that Mr. Steele will eventually start naming one of two individual does in each case just so that he can try to leverage the fear associated with being identified by dangling that threat over the remaining does' heads. Unfortunately, I think someone being taken to trial is the only way that Mr. Steele can be taken down. He acknowledged on this site that his evidence may be flawed, but he knows he only has to show it if there is a trial