Record $250K Porn File-Sharing Settlement Reached
 

In what apparently is the largest file-sharing settlement against a single defendant in the U.S., an East Coast man has consented to a $250,000 judgment against him for uploading six Corbin Fisher movies.
XBIZ has learned that Boston-area resident T S signed settlement papers on Christmas Eve, just four days after the gay studio filed a complaint against the BitTorrent defendant who was identified through his IP address.

Marc Randazza, Corbin Fisher's general counsel, told XBIZ he knows of no other file-sharing settlement, porn or mainstream, that has reached this dollar high.

"This case was airtight," Randazza said. "Some people fight like cats and dogs; he didn't."

Randazza noted that the defendant, who is in his 20s, is "one of our Patient Zeroes" relative to his prolific distribution of Corbin Fisher content using torrents.

"T S is not merely one of many who steal the [Corbin Fisher's] copyrighted works online, T S is one of the primary sources of the stolen Corbin Fisher works circulating on the Internet," Randazza wrote in the copyright infringement complaint.

"T S provided copies of [Corbin Fisher's] copyrighted works to various torrent sites, where they were recirculated and redistributed widely," the suit said.

Corbin Fisher movies allegedly uploaded through BitTorrent and named in the T S suit include "Mason Fucks Trey," "Aiden," "Connor Fucks Ryan," "Jude Fucks Austin," "Carter Fucks Justin" and "Preston Fucks Trey."

Corbin Fisher, in the settlement, agreed to halve its actual damages in the suit to $250,000, with T S entitiled to "an opportunity to reduce the amount payable to if he ceases any further content theft (whether the plaintiff’s content or anyone elses), and if he makes regular payments toward the judgment on a schedule, which will be agreed upon between the parties in a separate settlement agreement."

Attorney Evan Stone, who represents a number of companies in porn BitTorrent litigation, called the file-sharing settlement "eye-popping" because of its high-dollar sum.

"I don't know of any settlement of its kind with anything close to that figure," Stone told XBIZ. "That's wild; very surprised."


A federal judge has yet to sign off on the consent judgment.

http://www.xbiz.com/news/128936

Lightspeed needs to step his quasi-blackmail game up to compete.

That's a pretty serious settlement...

You will have to mention this case in your lecture about suing IP addresses. :thumbsup

That other guy (Jimmy Stephans?) was getting some nice settlements or whatever from doing something similar.

Not sure if it was IP addresses he was going after. He was tracking down individuals.

another DVtimes news report
yay!

I can't believe this is getting off the first page. This is a very big deal people.

That's huge.

Wonder how he got introuble, since he was just time-shifting the movies.

Say what you want comparing this to the war on drugs, anyone and everyone will think twice before pirating Corbin Fisher content.

Where the money really needs to be spent is making this news widely available and known to the general public.

From my understanding he used DMCA 512(h) subpoenas :thumbsup Also didn't hurt that he hired PI's and lawyers too. Then again, he served the processor who essentially handed over the entire server log files.

maybe he was just using then internet as a back up device. his torrents may be also seen as parody. the courts crushed his free speech rights. fucking gay.

I guess the time shifting argument didn't work.:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Those guys are no joke when it comes to copyright litigations. Now can't wait when they fry Brazzers ass in court (spankwire lawsuit).

In order for it to work, you have to actually try it.

This is a settlement agreement, not a verdict that came after full adjudication of a case. ;-)

I don't want to take this thread off on a big tangent, but.... the time-shifting fair use argument is not a figment of gideon's imagination. If and when the facts of a case support the application of that defense, the court will permit the argument, and the trier of fact at hand (be it judge or jury) just might accept it.

Don't take my word for it; research the case law and confirm it for yourself. :2 cents:

wow one more person who finally looked at the case law and realized law actually support the arguement i have been making.

be careful doing your research and understanding the law as it actually written will get you labeled a pirate.

Grab the VCR and fire up the Delorian.
:thumbsup

no they won't..

they will make sure they cover their tracks better... :2 cents:




.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Yeah, but you ignore the fact that stupid laws have been written before
and later destroyed in court.

This is one of those kinds of laws.

Piracy is like obscenity : "We know it when we see it".

This is the way it will be because the modes of piracy will change with new technology.

Free loop holes for theft will ultimately close since the government needs my tax dollars
and they don't get tax dollars from pirates.

Now it's "quasi" blackmail? hahah - nice little backpedal there champ!

http://www.elsaelsa.com/wp-content/u.../backpedal.jpg



so when faced with all out PROOF that this anti-piracy method works brilliantly (you think anyone who hears about this case would EVER upload another stolen Corbin Fisher video?) you back down ever so slightly from your pro-pirate verbal assault on copyright protectors...


Your whole life revolves around your silly stance that there is NOTHING that can be done to combat piracy - well you are being proven wrong now my friend - I think you will owe Steve one of your famous blowjobs when all is said and done.






.

I thought it resolved around PORNBEER.

Porn Beer
Porn
Beer
Porn Beer

:winkwink:

First, the fair use argument in question isn't a "law;" it is a legal precedent that informs the court's interpretation of a law. There's a significant difference between the two. :2 cents:

Second, just because I've said that in some circumstances, when the facts of a case support it, the fair use of "time-shifting" argument can prevail, that's not the same thing as saying that I believe it applies universally in copyright infringement cases, or can be employed successfully when there are other factors involved, like public display, public performance, or an illicit means of obtaining the copyrighted material in the first place.

I'm as anti-piracy as they come, my friend. I just believe that intellectual honesty is important, so when a person with whom I might disagree on a subjective issue says something that is objectively true, I feel compelled to give them credit for the truth of that statement.

here here
however one case you might want to look at is cablevision vs 20th century fox

the destinction between public transmission and public performance has been clearly defined

the lower court did not recognize the difference and criminalized the timeshifting in a cloud by considering in a public performance
the appeals court (thanks to a filing by the EFF) recognized that public transmission that makes a local private copy which is then played independently is not a public performance but a private performance publically transmitted.

the legal definitition is very important for the issue of torrents given the way the technology works.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/08/victory-dvrs-cloud

the full transcript of the ruling is also available
and it was upheld by the supreme court too.

I am doing this small scale-

I have sites/blogs where i make pages about current news in tubes/torrents/piracy.
All of the news pertains to things like this, lawsuits, settlements and very importantly how dangerous illegal tubes and torrents are i.e. viruses, malware, spam etc.

I make it very clear to the people reading that all of this shit is going down and in the end downloading illegal content simply isn't worth it, without mentioning anything about "theft is wrong" or that kind of angle which does not work.

How many people do I reach? I would estimate 200 unique visitors a day see my tubes/torrents news pages. That is not much, but imagine if 100 webmasters did the same thing...

Suddenly you would have 20,000 unique visitors a day reading about the inherent dangers of tubes and torrents from both a legal and practical viewpoint.

Remember- a webmaster posted his poll findings here a while back asking 1000 people why they pay for porn and the NUMBER ONE RESPONSE was "Because i do not want viruses and maleware and i am sick of spam from illegal tubes and torrents so i would rather pay and not have the headaches" (thats a rough phrasing).

Ouch.

That's at least one prick who will be thinking twice about passing around content that doesn't belong to him.

I hope this motivates others to actually sue these content theives rather than just sitting around crying about lost income then going out of business.

Even if only 1% of people are prosecuted or sent shitty legal warnings, it will act as a deterrent to others.

Bingo...

already exposed as puffed up number

the real settlement is way smaller


http://torrentfreak.com/biggest-ever...iguing-110107/

What's your deal? Seriously. Every time an anti-piracy thread comes up it seems to rub you the wrong way. :disgust

Do you not approve of it? Do you support piracy? Do you think fighting illegal file sharing is counter-productive for this industry?

Do tell us, because at this point I'm just assuming the worst.

Problem with time shifting arguments when you are the torrent uploader is that you also put inside the torrent a file telling everyone how you fucked their mommy... or daddy in this case.

It's his level of marketing excellence. Be sure to all do business with him in Vegas. :1orglaugh

And don't forget to listen to his seminar on suing pirates. :thumbsup

feel the love

A great victory. But how much of those thousands of dollars will he actually be able to pay?
The guy is in his 20s! A settlement is totally ridiculous 0 unless he has a uber-rich family and drives around in a Ferrari.

Not really.

I mean by the time he's 40 the minimum wage will be $250,000 an hour.

And only the homeless will be able to accept that pay.

:1orglaugh

the real settlement exists in a hidden side agreement

this is just the puffery done to get press for the settlement, he is never going to pay 250k
the hidden deal is what is real, it probably some insanely small deal less than the cost of getting a lawyer, just so that the fake news story about the huge settlement could be shown to the world.

$250k! Damn, that's some nice pocket change....

Read between the lines, he'll pay pennies on the dollar.

Bingo


So I take it you missed my is Damian Pro-Piracy thread?

Who cares if at the end of the day he doesn't pay 250k if he doesn't have it. But if he does...

Now on to the next user, is it worth risking what you have up to that amount possibly to share some porn?

Serious business