Massachusetts Legal Developments Blog

Massachusetts Legal Developments Blog

Judge Searns Orders Plaintiffs to Explain Joinder

On Septebmer 21st, New Sensations v. Does 1-201, 12-cv-11720, a judge in the District of Massachusetts has ordered the plaintiffs in these peer-to-peer cases to show cause why all the does should not be severed.  What makes this remarkable is that Judge Searns entered the order without any such order being requested by the Does.  This is a strong indication that the court is prepared to revisit the issue of joinder which was allowed in the Liberty Media case (discussed here).

Forcing the plaintiffs to pay an up-front filing fee for each John Doe defendant could spell the end of these peer to peer cases, and if judges are willing to make that sort of order even before the subpoenas go out, the plaintiffs may ultimately conclude that the game just isn't worth the candle.

SBO Pictures, Inc. v. Does 1 - 46, 12-cv-11723

Case Title: SBO Pictures, Inc. v. Does 1 - 46

Docket Number:  12-cv-11723

Court: Massachusetts District Court, Boston

Plaintiff's Attorney: Marvin Cable

Complaint: 12-cv-11723 - Complaint

Complaint Attachments: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C

Content Title: My Personal Message

Content for Sale: (Unknown!)

 

Marvin Cable has filed a complaint for copyright violation, alleging that 46 John Doe defendants have downloaded a file titled "My Personal Mesage"  The copyright was registered in February of 2012.

As of 09/19/2012, I have been unable to find any web page offering this particular title for sale.

The complaint in this case includes (1) direct infringement, (2) vicarious infringement, (3) Parental liability and (4) contributory liability.

If you, or someone you know, has been contacted regarding this case, contact me immediately to discus your options.

New Sensations, Inc. v. Does 1 - 201, 12-cv-11720

Case Title: New Sensations, Inc. v. Does 1 - 201

Docket Number:  12-cv-11720

Court: Massachusetts District Court, Boston

Plaintiff's Attorney: Marvin Cable

Complaint: 12-cv-11720 - Complaint

Complaint Attachments: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C

Content Title: Dirty Little Schoolgirl Stories #4

Content for Sale: CD Universe

 

Marvin Cable has filed a complaint for copyright violation, alleging that 201 John Doe defendants have downloaded a file titled "Dirty Little Schoolgirl Stories #4."  The copyright was registered in May of 2012.

As of 09/19/2012, this title sells on CD Universe for $24.29.  This case includes allegations of copyright infringement for the same work listed in New Sensations v. Does 1-175, except that the alleged dates of infringement in this case range from April to May of 2012, whereas New Sensations v. Does 1-175 range from May to August.

The complaint in this case includes (1) direct infringement, (2) vicarious infringement, (3) Parental liability and (4) contributory liability.

If you, or someone you know, has been contacted regarding this case, contact me immediately to discus your options.

---UPDATES---

On September 21st, in this case, District Judge Richard Stears ordered the plainitffs to show cause why all the Does except Doe number one should not be severed.  You can read the order here.

New Sensations, Inc. v. Does 1 - 175, 12-cv-11721

Case Title: New Sensations, Inc. v. Does 1 - 175

Docket Number:  12cv11721

Court: Massachusetts District Court, Boston

Plaintiff's Attorney: Marvin Cable

Complaint: 12-cv-11721 - Complaint

Complaint Attachments: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C

Content Title: Dirty Little Schoolgirl Stories 4

Content for Sale: CD Universe

 

Marvin Cable has filed a complaint for copyright violation, alleging that 175 John Doe defendants have downloaded a file titled Dirty Little Schoolgirl Stories 4.  The copyright was registered in May of 2012.

This case includes allegations of copyright infringement for the same work listed in New Sensations v. Does 1-201, except that the alleged dates of infringement in this case range from May through August of 2012, whereas New Sensations v. Does 1-201 range from April to May.

The complaint in this case includes (1) direct infringement, (2) vicarious infringement, (3) Parental liability and (4) contributory liability. 

If you, or someone you know, has been contacted regarding this case, contact me immediately to discus your options.

Media Products, Inc. v. Does 1 - 175, 12-cv-11722

Case Title: Media Products, Inc. v. Does 1 - 175

Docket Number: 12-cv-11722

Court: Massachusetts District Court, Boston

Plaintiff's Attorney: Marvin Cable

Complaint: 12-cv-11722 - Complaint

Complaint Attachments: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C

Content Title:  Wanna Fuck My Daughter Gotta Fuck Me First 13

Content for Sale: CD Universe

 

Marvin Cable has filed a complaint for copyright violation, alleging that 175 John Doe defendants have downloaded a file titled Wanna Fuck My Daughter, Gotta Fuck Me First 13.  The copyright was registered in Februrary of 2012.

The complaint in this case includes (1) direct infringement, (2) vicarious infringement, (3) Parental liability and (4) contributory liability.

If you, or someone you know, has been contacted regarding this case, contact me immediately to discus your options.

Exquisite Multimedia, Inc. v. Does 1 - 46 1:12-cv-11724

Case Title: Exquisite Multimedia, Inc. v. Does 1 - 46

Docket Number: 1:12-cv-11724

Court: Massachusetts District Court, Boston

Plaintiff's Attorney: Marvin Cable

Complaint: 12-cv-11724 - Complaint

Complaint Attachments: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C

Content Title: Ironman XXX

Content for Sale: CD Universe

 

Marvin Cable has filed a complaint for copyright violation, alleging that 46 John Doe defendants have downloaded a file titled Ironman XXX.  The copyright was registered in November of 2011.

This film appears to be a low budget adult version of the recent Iron Man film.  The complaint in this case includes (1) direct infringement, (2) vicarious infringement, (3) Parental liability and (4) contributory liability.

Count 4, contributory liability includes an allegation that the  subscriber derived a financial benefit from the alleged infringers (think about a case where a landlord rented an internet connection to someoen who used that connection to infringe on a copyright).  That allegation falls outside of the negligence cliaim which has been (correctly) rejected by so many courts, and potentially within the argument adopted in the  disc jokey cases, which have been accepted by various courts.

If you, or someone you know, has been contacted regarding this case, contact me immediately to discus your options.

Pages