It seems some greedy lawyers will say anything to force folks into paying speculative demands even if the folks have no clue what its all about.http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131213/15210325563/malibu-media-sanctioned-again-bogus-copyright-abuse-intimidation.shtml
Back in September, we wrote about porn trolling company Malibu Media getting sanctioned for its ridiculous use of "Exhibit C" in its legal filings against people it accused of unauthorized downloads of porn content that it held the copyright on. Exhibit C was a completely useless exhibit that had nothing to do with the actual case at hand, but listed out other content that Malibu insisted the same person was downloading. None of the titles listed in Exhibit C were content where Malibu Media held the copyright. Instead, it was almost always titles of porn videos that would be considered very embarrassing for some people. The obvious intention: scare people into settling early to avoid having their names attached to a federal lawsuit where the records showed a long list of explicitly named movies that someone had downloaded. The court in the Western District of Wisconsin sanctioned Malibu's lawyers $200 per case, for a total of $2,200.
Now, in a similar finding over in the Eastern District of Wisonsin, Judge Rudolph Randa has basically found the same thing and piled another $600 in sanctions for three cases in that district onto Malibu Media. Another $600 is pocket change of course, but there are a ton more of these cases out there, and if more and more courts start recognizing the game that Malibu is playing... we could be in for another Prenda-like domino effect. The court makes it clear that it recognizes that Malibu Media is abusing the judicial process to try to convince people to pay up.
Give a group of folks a monopoly and what can you expect, the innocent will be stomped on along with the guilty and the real point of all this is that whilst the copyright tax brigade continues to get anti consumer laws passed after giving government officials free holidays and campaign donations etc theres always going to be a reason for lawyers to look at exploiting a victim whether or not they actually took any part in the alleged infringement of copyright, along with ludicrous legal ramblings that tie judges into making astronomical awards for even the flimsiest of supposed infractions I can only see this abuse of the legal process continuing.