Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via Twitter @plagiarismtoday.
First off today, Cyrus Farivar at Ars Technica reports that a motion filed against Prenda Law in Florida makes the claim that Prenda Law itself, or someone working with them, may have been the ones to post the BitTorrent files they have been suing over.
Prenda Law became well known for filing massive lawsuits over suspected BitTorrent file sharing targeting IP addresses of users. Once they compelled ISPs to turn over subscriber information, they then threatened the individuals with litigation if they didn’t pay a heavy settlement cost. However, when some defendants fought back, it was revealed that at least some of the companies the lawyers were representing were, really, shell companies for the attorneys.
The new filing alleges that Prenda’s forensics company, 6881 Forensics, reports receiving data on a BitTorrent swarm before it actually began, which is only explainable by clock errors and the investigators being in on the swarm within a very short period of time. John Steele, the lead attorney at Prenda, has denied having uploaded the files and says he is not involved in the Florida cases.
2: French Court Orders Apple to Pay $6.5M Copyright Tax on iPads, Country Mulls Future Cultural Levies
Next up today, Jeff John Roberts at Paid Content reports that a Paris court has ordered Apple to turn over 5 million Euros ($6.54 million) in copyright fees it collected on iPads sold in the country in 2011 even though the fees were eliminated in 2012.
The money will go to Copie France, a copyright society in France, though the amount is provisional as the court has yet to make its final ruling on the amount owed.
In 2012 France declined to expand the blank media levy to devices such as tablets though a new government report has suggested applying such a tax to such devices in the near future. However, elsewhere in the EU, such tariffs remain controversial and divisive.
Finally today, Ed Currasco at New Media Rockstars writes that CBS, which owns the rights to the popular show “Judge Judy”, has filed suit against Jessie Zaragosa, which they allege ran multiple YouTube accounts where he posted episodes of the show and, according to the lawsuit, made money from the postings.
The lawsuit goes on to say that YouTube complied with multiple requests from CBS to take down Zaragosa’s “Judge Judy” postings but Zaragosa filed counter-notices to YouTube, demanding that the service restore his videos.
The lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court.
That’s it for the three count today. We will be back tomorrow with three more copyright links. If you have a link that you want to suggest a link for the column or have any proposals to make it better. Feel free to leave a comment or send me an email. I hope to hear from you.
Want the Full Story?
Tune in every Wednesday evening at 5 PM ET for the live recording of the Copyright 2.0 Show or wait and get the edited version Friday right here on Plagiarism Today.