Illinois Federal Judge, Milton Shadur dismissed a copyright infringement lawsuit earlier this week after an anonymous defendant filed an amateur “Motion to Quash”, stating that the defendants arguments made more sense than those of the copyright attorney bringing the lawsuit.
The copyright infringement lawsuit involved CP Productions, a leading producer of adult entertainment content on the internet, and 300 alleged copyright infringing defendants. CP filed suit against the 300 alleged infringers for downloading copyright protected material, referred to as “Cowgirl Creampie.” CP Productions hired a Chicago-based copyright lawyer John Steele to head up the litigation.
Four months into the copyright infringement lawsuit, annoyed Judge Shadur wanted to toss the case, and issued a memo addressing the problems with the case.
"It is an understatement to characterize [this case] as problematic in nature."
Steele objected, stating that the delay was the fault of ISP’s who were backed up in IP address lookup requests from other P2P lawyers.
The judge allowed the copyright infringement lawsuit to proceed until an anonymous defendant entered an amateur “motion to quash” of Steele’s subpoenas. Judge Shadur immediately used the motion as the grounds for a total dismissal of the copyright litigation, stating that “the court was correct the first time around.”
"Among other things, the newest motion demonstrates that there is no justification for dragging into an Illinois federal court, on a wholesale basis, a host of unnamed defendants over whom personal jurisdiction clearly does not exist and—more importantly—as to whom CP’s counsel could readily have ascertained that fact," the judge said.”
"Counsel’s filing of that motion on the very next day after the Order was entered suggests that counsel was well aware of the action’s problematic nature and had already marshaled arguments intended to meet the obvious problems that it appeared to present," he wrote.
"No predicate has been shown for thus combining 300 separate actions on the cheap," he added. "If CP had sued the 300 claimed infringers separately for their discrete infringements, the filing fees alone would have aggregated $105,000 rather than $350."
The intellectual property case was dismissed.
The combining of alleged copyright infringers into a single lawsuit involving copyrighted material on the internet has taken place in several states, most of which have been dismissed.
It is important to hire an expert copyright attorney who knows how to correctly file your particular matter. Traverse Legal specializes in copyright infringement representation and litigation. If you have an on-line defamation, free speech or intellectual property issue, you may contact one our internet attorneys today at 866-936-7447.