• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Supboena warning from ISP following DMCA demand for $200

fixbsod

Senior member
So a few weeks ago I got about 10 e-mails all at the same time, straight to my spam inbox reporting to be DMCA e-mails from my ISP. Each e-mail listed the same supposed file downloaded (so much for open wifi huh) and in a move I hadn't seen before a link requesting $200 with a due date or else 'further legal action' would be sought. Considering I got 10 e-mails straight to my spam box I of course ignored it.

Come a few weeks later and I receive a nice little letter from my ISP (Charter) notifying me that they received a subpoena request from CP Productions INC and included some ex parte request for discovery filed in the US District Court in my state against 'John Doe' and the subpoena filed in Illinois for Charter. Not sure why in IL, as everything I see notes Charter's headquarters is in Missouri, although as the letter did come from Charter they must belive it to be valid. However, no file was detailed -- it was 'unknown', so an unknown file against a John Doe, but this would be a valid reason for Charter to disclose my info I guess.

I spoke with an attorney who specialized in this and his recommended course of action would be to hire him for $1,500 (big surprise his suggestion is to hire him) and then he would try and settle out of court for $2,200. He said the other option was that they would seek settlement directly from me once the info was obtained from the ISP which would likely be $3,400. Yes, $300 less...but supposedly I would be admitting guilt and all that bs. The attorney did not want to file a motion to quash as this would make me more of a target. Supposedly there are like 300 John Does, some 4+ pages enjoined on this Civil Action, although I could not see this on my paperwork -- he looked up the case online (pacer?). Additionally if they did not want to settle the $1,500 may not cover further legal needs.

I'm thinking my best course of action is to just ignore all of this, at the current time and wait and see if anything even comes up. I know this may sound crazy to some, but it seems silly to pay $1,500 for someone to just offer a settlement -- couldn't I just do this, IF it came to that? I'm just pissed because I don't see how I'm still responsible because of open wifi -- how does every Starbucks, McDonalds and every other store in town have open wifi if they would be on the hook for $3,000+ for every pirated file?? Wouldn't these places be targets due to their deeper pockets? How are they still around?

Has anyone else gone thru this crap? What was the process and outcome? Did you have to hire an attorney? Pay a settlement? I'm thinking they have no $$ to come after me as it's an adult studio and not a Hollywood studio, so they are just gonna shake the tree and see how much money falls and then be done with it. Do they really follow up with individuals? If they do get a civil judgement is that enforceable with tax intercepts and wage garnishment or is it more of a collections / damage your credit history type penalty?
 
Cus I live in a small neighborhood and didn't realize that I am still considered liable...like I noted above every Tom, Dick and Harry mom & pop shop in my town has open wifi (and no, not just Stabucks/McDs, but true small mom & pop businesses, like sole prop coffee shops and whatnot). So much for being nice.

Can we keep this On topic and not berate me for having open wifi and being nice.
 
facepalm06.jpg
 
Wireless wide open = can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt it was you. Granted this is Civil so it is more based on who paid the judge more in "donations."
 
I'd probably call my ISP to confirm, then, go to court. You shouldn't be held liable for the actions of other people. Just because you did something stupid (open wifi) doesn't mean that you are responsible for what other people did using your network connection.
 
Cus I live in a small neighborhood and didn't realize that I am still considered liable...like I noted above every Tom, Dick and Harry mom & pop shop in my town has open wifi (and no, not just Stabucks/McDs, but true small mom & pop businesses, like sole prop coffee shops and whatnot). So much for being nice.

Can we keep this On topic and not berate me for having open wifi and being nice.

As nice a neighbour as you seem to be, I personally would be very worried about someone using my open wifi to download kiddie porn or something that would go beyond a fine.

As far as just ignoring it, that very rarely makes a problem go away. I would wait for the next shoe to drop before spending any money. After the ISP has provided the information to CP Productions they will have to make a specific claim. That is the time to either try to settle or fight it based on the files being downloaded by someone else over your open wifi.
 
google this

judges are quashing these lawsuits on the grounds they are not one conspiracy and that IP's don't identify a user

go to court and argue one of these points especially the latter one

having an open wifi is almost like a get out of jail free card for a lawsuit like this

you have to think in this logically. the lawsuit says you violated some law, it will be in the paperwork. to prove this the plaintiff has to offer proof. part of the complaint will be that they detected your IP downloading stuff.

you go to court and say that the IP is assigned to your modem which has open wifi attached. they can't prove it was you

chances are this is a porn company doing a fishing expedition to get your name so they can sue you personally and get you to settle in hopes of you not wanting to be embarrassed that you look at porn
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't be surprised if someday soon open wifi routers are ruled to be an attractive nuisance such that unsecuring them opens you up to vicarious liability.
 
See, it's hard to tell who's being more slippery -- the attorney telling me it's $1,500 to request a settlement and who doesn't think a motion to quash is a good idea (would make me stand out) despite the supposed 300+ john does listed, and the fact I've told him I have open wifi. OR the BS company this whole thing is coming from. Seems like a whole you pat my back (get the settlements) and we'll pat your back (keep new fish coming) ??
 
Re: the 1.5million judgement --

RIAA == adult industry

and this is the first time I have ever had any type of any offense that wasn't just a speeding ticket or something.
 
Again, if this is really how it works then can someone explain how every McDs, Starbucks and nearly every other shop has free open wifi ?? You'd think they'd HAVE to charge a few $$ just to cover these bs settlements.
 
Again, if this is really how it works then can someone explain how every McDs, Starbucks and nearly every other shop has free open wifi ?? You'd think they'd HAVE to charge a few $$ just to cover these bs settlements.

Doesn't Starbucks require you to login using credentials? A while back (3 or so years) I went to a Starbucks to use wifi and I either had to get login credentials from the baristas or use my TMobile account. It may have changed since then, but if it hasn't they'd be able to track infringement back to a single user.
 
Again, if this is really how it works then can someone explain how every McDs, Starbucks and nearly every other shop has free open wifi ?? You'd think they'd HAVE to charge a few $$ just to cover these bs settlements.

stores have an "I accept terms and conditions" window that you have to go through first

Part of the terms is you promise you don't do anything bad, and that's all it takes.

Quit making up excuses... you dun goofed boy and now you're fucked
 
Back
Top