Florida Copyright Troll Subpoena Defense

What Are Copyright Trolls?

Over the past few years our legal system has witnessed the emergence of “copyright trolls” – opportunistic entities that obtain and enforce copyrights for the purpose of making money through aggressive litigation. Recently, there has been a particular tidal wave of copyright troll cases filed in the Florida state and federal courts by various adult film (i.e. pornography) companies. Federal courts in Colorado have also experienced a surge in copyright troll litigation.

Copyright Troll Litigation in Federal Court

Typically, in these federal lawsuits the copyright trolls alleges that several John Doe defendants have infringed and contributorily infringed upon their copyrights in pornographic videos. At first, these John Doe defendants are only known and identified by the copyright trolls by their Internet Protocol (or “IP”) address – a specific and unique series of numbers assigned to each Internet subscriber by his or her Internet Service Provider (or “ISP”) (such as Comcast, Verizon, etc.). The copyright trolls then obtain a court order allowing them to subpoena the John Doe defendants’ personally identifying information (such as name, address, telephone number, and email address) from their Internet Service Providers. Usually, Internet Service Providers will notify the John Does of these subpoenas and provide a limited amount of time for the John Doe defendants to file a motion to quash or otherwise challenge the subpoena in order to attempt to prevent the disclosure of their personally identifying information.  If the copyright trolls obtain a John Doe defendant’s personally identifying information they will harass that individual for a large settlement payment and threaten to bring further litigation. The true motivation of any copyright troll is to make money by forcing each of the “John Doe” defendants to settle the claim or face public humiliation or even loss of employment as a result of having their names disclosed and associated with fetish pornography and illegal activity.

Copyright Troll Litigation in Florida State Court (the “Pure Bill of Discovery”)

In an attempt to defer the expense of filing a federal lawsuit and circumvent adverse federal precedent, some copyright trolls have been suing Internet subscribers in Florida’s state courts using Complaints in Equity for a Pure Bill of Discovery.  Florida’s Pure Bill of Discovery is an arcane legal action, the entire purpose of which is to uncover evidence that is necessary for the filing of a second lawsuit.  In these cases, the subsequent lawsuit would be a federal suit for copyright infringement.

Through these Complaints in Equity for Pure Bill of Discovery, copyright trolls generally allege that hundreds of John Doe defendants violated a copyright to a particular adult film and identify each defendant by their unique IP address. Like in the federal lawsuits, the copyright trolls issue subpoenas to the John Doe defendants’ ISPs demanding that the ISPs disclose the John Does’ names, addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses.  If the copyright trolls obtain a John Doe defendant’s personally identifying information they will harass that individual for a large settlement payment and threaten to bring further litigation. The copyright trolls’ motivation in these Florida state court lawsuits is no different than in their federal lawsuits. Copyright trolls always  want to coerce each of the John Doe defendants into settling these claims of copyright infringement for as much money as possible by threatening public humiliation or even loss of employment as a result of having their names disclosed and associated with obscene pornography and illegal activity.

Tamaroff & Tamaroff Can Help You Fight Copyright Trolls!!!

The Florida-based copyright troll subpoena defense attorneys at Tamaroff & Tamaroff represent the John Doe defendants in these cases brought by copyright trolls.  While other Florida attorneys may handle only a few of these copyright troll cases, Tamaroff & Tamaroff focuses its practice on copyright troll subpoena defense.  We work to defend our clients by filing motions to quash, motions to sever and dismiss, motions to issue protective orders, motions for reconsideration, and motions to dismiss.  If our clients choose to settle, we make sure that they don’t spend one dollar more than is necessary.  We work tirelessly to fight copyright trolls and serve our clients to the best of our abilities.

If you have received a letter from your Internet Service Provider informing you that your information is being subpoenaed or if you have been contacted by the copyright trolls, email admin@tamarofflaw.com or call us at (305) 350-7440. Don’t hesitate – your rights may depend on swift legal action!

Pending Cases that Copyright Trolls have Filed:

In the Circuit Court of the 11th Judicial District in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida:

• Patrick Collins, Inc. v. Does, State Case No. 13-2012-CA-032591-0000-01 / Local Case No. 2012-32591-CA-01 (Fla. Cir. Ct., filed August 17, 2012)
• Patrick Collins, Inc. v. Does, State Case No. 13-2012-CA-032595-0000-01 / Local Case No. 2012-32595-CA-01 (Fla. Cir. Ct., filed August 17, 2012)

United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida:

• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 0:13-cv-60913-JIC (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 0:13-cv-61023-JIC (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 0:13-cv-61024-WPD (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 0:13-cv-61025-RSR (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 1:13-cv-21577-DLG (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 1:13-cv-21578-JAL (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 1:13-cv-21579-JEM (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 1:13-cv-21581-DLG (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 1:13-cv-21582-CMA (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 4:13-cv-10100-JLK (S.D. Fla., 05/02/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 9:13-cv-80178-KLR (S.D. Fla., 02/20/13)
  
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 9:13-cv-80179-KAM (S.D. Fla., 02/20/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 9:13-cv-80180-KAM (S.D. Fla., 02/20/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 9:13-cv-80181-DTKH (S.D. Fla., 02/20/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 9:13-cv-80182-RNS (S.D. Fla., 02/20/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 9:13-cv-80183-DMM (S.D. Fla., 02/20/13)

United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida:

United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida:

• Celestial, Inc. v. Does 1-377, 5:12-cv-00375-RS-CJK (N.D. Fla., 11/20/2012)
• Celestial, Inc. v. Does 1-338, 4:12-cv-00605-RH-CAS (N.D. Fla., 11/19/12)
• Celestial, Inc. v. Does 1-228, 3:12-cv-00554-MCR-CJK (N.D. Fla., 11/19/12)
• Celestial, Inc. v. Does 1-467, 1:12-cv-00264-SPM-GRJ (N.D. Fla., 11/19/12)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Does 1-25, 1:12-cv-00217-MP-GRJ (N.D. Fla., 09/24/12)
• Third Degree Films, Inc. v. Does 1-63, 4:12-cv-00498-WS-CAS (N.D. Fla., 09/24/12)
• West Coast Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-581, 5:12-cv-00277-RS-EMT (N.D. Fla., 08/29/12)

United States District Court for the District of Colorado:

• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 76.25.90.159, 1:13-cv-00645-REB-MJW (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 75.70.130.162, 1:13-cv-00644-WYD (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 71.196.185.110, 1:13-cv-00643-PAB (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 24.9.160.175, 1:13-cv-00642-REB-KLM (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 24.8.98.8, 1:13-cv-00641-REB-KLM (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 24.8.173.143, 1:13-cv-00639-WYD (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 174.51.106.174, 1:13-cv-00638-WJM-KMT (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 173.160.32.241, 1:13-cv-00637-PAB (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• Purzel Video GmbH v. Does 1-39, 1:13-cv-00598-WYD-MEH (D. Colo., 03/11/13)
• R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-66, 1:13-cv-00433-PAB-KLM (D. Colo., 02/19/13)
• R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-50, 1:13-cv-00432-RBJ-BNB (D. Colo., 02/19/13)
• R&D Film 1, LLC v. Doe 1, 1:13-cv-00431-WJM-CBS (D. Colo., 02/19/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 97.121.170.141, 1:13-cv-00428-MSK (D. Colo., 02/18/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 75.171.198.44, 1:13-cv-00427-PAB-MEH (D. Colo., 02/18/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 71.218.22.157, 1:13-cv-00426-RBJ-MEH (D. Colo., 02/18/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 71.212.197.251, 1:13-cv-00425-MSK-KMT (D. Colo., 02/18/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 69.29.143.104, 1:13-cv-00424-MSK (D. Colo., 02/18/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 63.225.246.31, 1:13-cv-00423-WJM-KLM (D. Colo., 02/18/13)
• R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-18, 1:13-cv-00414-REB (D. Colo., 02/15/13)
• R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-14, 1:13-cv-00413-PAB-KLM (D. Colo., 02/15/13)
• Zambezia Film (Pty) Ltd. v. Does 1-76, 1:13-cv-00396-RBJ-MEH (D. Colo., 02/13/13)
• Zambezia Film (Pty) Ltd. v. Does 1-38, 1:13-cv-00395-RBJ-KMT (D. Colo., 02/13/13)
• Zambezia Film (Pty) Ltd. v. Does 1-37, 1:13-cv-00392-MSK-MJW (D. Colo., 02/13/13)
• Zambezia Film (Pty) Ltd. v. Does 1-31, 1:13-cv-00278-CMA-MJW (D. Colo., 02/12/13)
• Zambezia Film (Pty) Ltd. v. Does 1-27, 1:13-cv-00377-MSK-KMT (D. Colo., 02/12/13)
• Zambezia Film (Pty) Ltd. v. Does 1-20, 1:13-cv-00342-CMA-MEH (D. Colo., 02/07/13)
• Zambezia Film (Pty) Ltd. v. Does 1-14, 1:13-cv-00399-WYD-KLM (D. Colo., 02/07/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 98.245.5.127, 1:13-cv-00320-MSK-KMT (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 98.245.181.0, 1:13-cv-00319-RBJ-MEH (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 98.245.154.142, 1:13-cv-00318-PAB-MEH (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 75.71.30.155, 1:13-cv-00317-CMA-KMT (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 1:13-cv-00316-CMA-CBS (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 67.166.4.135, 1:13-cv-00315-REB-KMT (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 24.9.238.91, 1:13-cv-00314-CMA-BNB (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 24.9.122.61, 1:13-cv-00313-RBJ-BNB (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 1:13-cv-00312-REB-KLM (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 24.9.100.137, 1:13-cv-00311-RBJ-MEH (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 24.8.34.85, 1:13-cv-00310-PAB-MEH (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 24.8.161.234, 1:13-cv-00309-WJM-CBS (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, 1:13-cv-00308-RBJ-MEH (D. Colo., 02/05/13)
• Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe 174.51.234.104, 1:13-cv-00307-PAB-MEH (D. Colo., 02/05/13)

United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas:

• Studio West Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-205, 4:12-cv-03691 (S.D. Tex., Dec. 20, 2012)
• Studio West Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-237, 4:12-cv-03690 (S.D. Tex., Dec. 20, 2012)
• Combat Zone Corp. v. Does 1-8, 4:12-cv-02972 (S.D. Tex., Oct. 4, 2012)

If your information is being subpoenaed or you are being contacted by copyright trolls, email admin@tamarofflaw.com or call us at (305) 350-7440. Don’t hesitate – your rights may depend on swift legal action!

Malibu Media Copyright Troll Florida Subpoena Defense

Patrick Collins Copyright Troll Florida Subpoena Defense

COPYRIGHT TROLL & BITTORRENT LITIGATION BLOG

DON’T CONTACT THE COPYRIGHT TROLLS’ ATTORNEYS!!!

Many “John Doe” defendants inadvertently contact the attorneys representing copyright trolls. Directly contacting the attorneys who represent these copyright trolls could jeopardize your anonymity and result in the loss of legal rights. Even if you are interested in settling a claim of copyright infringement, you lose a substantial amount of negotiation leverage by disclosing your identity. All contact with copyright trolls and their attorneys should be directed through a defense lawyer. Law firms, attorneys, and the staff who represent copyright trolls are not on your side and should NOT be contacted by John Doe Defendants!

*Tamaroff & Tamaroff, P.A. represents clients in the types of cases discussed above; however, all individually cited cases are merely examples of the type of litigation described and Tamaroff & Tamaroff, P.A. does not assert or imply that it represents clients in all or any specific cases listed.

**All attorneys associated with Tamaroff & Tamaroff, P.A. may not be admitted to practice in all of the above mentioned jurisdictions. Each attorney’s individual bar admissions can be found on their individual biographical pages.