Copyright Infringement Advisor

Monthly Archives: September 2012

Open WiFi Is NOT Negligence

Posted in Motion Practice, WiFi Negligence

I wanted to post a quick note about the new case recently filed by Daniel G. Ruggiero in Pennsylvania, as reported by DieTrollDie. [EDIT: Earlier I incorrectly identified the case] This case isn’t particularly noteworthy, except that the complaint includes a claim for negligence based on the subscriber having an unsecured WiFi network. The good news… Continue Reading

Seriously?!?! The CIA Has To Investigate Copyright Infringers? Updated

Posted in Interesting Cases

TorrentFreak just reported that the Australian equivalent of our C.I.A. (the Central Intelligence Agency, not the Copyright Infringement Advisor) was illegally spying on Kim Dotcom to help the U.S. build a case against MegaUpload. Turns out the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), the Australian CIA, is legally prohibited from spying on New Zealand citizens like… Continue Reading

Apple Infringes Swiss Rail Copyrights

Posted in Firm Cases, Interesting Cases

So you would think after Apple wins a billion dollars against Samsung for patent infringement, that they would be a little more sensitive about infringing the rights of others. Well, guess again. Swiss Federal Railways just announced that it may be pursuing legal action against Apple for putting a knock-off clock face in iOS 6…. Continue Reading

Abrahams v. Hard Drive: Update 2

Posted in Contingent Fee, Doe Counter-Suits, I.P. Address Suits, Interesting Cases, Porn Industry

Well this is big news:  Following up on my earlier update on this case, there was a hearing today on the Abrahams v. Hard Drive case to argue Abrahams two-strike dismissal motion.  I’m not exactly sure what was said, but here is the order basically dismissing Hard Drives claims. What?!?! It was stipulated that the… Continue Reading

Abrahams v. Hard Drive Productions: Update

Posted in Doe Counter-Suits, I.P. Address Suits, Porn Industry

So Seth Abrahams is fighting back hard against Hard Drive Productions in an excellent bittorrent battle down in California. Before we go any further, it’s important to get all the cases straight. First, Hard Drive originally sued a bunch of Does (11-1567).  Then, Hard Drive dropped that case and re-filed against only one Doe (11-5634). … Continue Reading

Ye Olden Tale of the Copyright Decree

Posted in Uncategorized

I had a request from Jason Lamb, a third-year student at the Temple University Beasley School of Law in Philadelphia, PA, to publish an interesting article that he wrote.  It’s a parodic history of copyright law, set in a medieval fantasy context. So enjoy, and thank you Jason. . .   Ye Olden Tale of… Continue Reading

Motion to Quash; Motion to Sever; Motion to Dismiss: What’s the Difference?

Posted in I.P. Address Suits, Motion Practice

The good folks over at FightCopyrightTrolls and DieTrollDie do a great job, probably better than anyone, at keeping everyone informed about the state of mass bittorrent litigation, frequently called copyright troll suits. One of the hottest topics, always, is what to do when you get that letter or email from your ISP telling you that… Continue Reading