Porn-trolling operation Prenda Law hit a major wall last month in its business of suing thousands of John Doe defendants over illegal porn downloads. Its lawyers were sanctioned, its cases began collapsing. However, with one exception, the Prenda-linked lawyers were preparing for appeal.
But then US District Judge Otis Wright ordered them to pay for a second bond, increasing the cost of their appeal to more than $237,000. On Friday, Prenda filed an emergency motion to appeal that order, saying that the new "onerous bond conditions" are unfair, and that it's in danger of losing "its ability to appeal what it believes to be serious violations of its Due Process rights."
In Friday's motion, Prenda wants the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to either throw out or modify that higher bond demand before June 25.
Much of the reasoning for the increased bond was that copyright-troll defense lawyer Morgan Pietz wants to be assured that if he beats Prenda in this appeal (docket), he'll get paid the sanctions he's already owed plus attorney's fees.
In copyright law, moreso than other areas, it's not usual for victorious defendants to be awarded legal fees. In today's motion, Prenda's appeal lawyers argue that Pietz's client, an unnamed John Doe defendant, didn't even appear in the contested lawsuits so he doesn't meet the legal standard for winning those fees. He's also ineligible for post-judgment interest, since Prenda was hit with a sanctions order not a judgment.
Closing up shop—or changing names?
Perhaps most notable in today's motion is the affidavit of Paul Duffy, Prenda's longtime lawyer. He argues that Prenda is shutting down and it's actually the defense attorneys digging for cash who are dragging out its life. "Prenda Law is currently winding down its operations and is in the process of dismissing its cases pursuant to the instructions of its clients," wrote Duffy. "In some instances, the dismissals are being opposed, resulting in delays and ongoing law and motion proceedings that have precluded Prenda Law from completely ceasing its operations."
Prenda has a "negative cash flow" and, as a result, can't afford the second bond that Wright ordered it to purchase in any case. "The same set of circumstances precludes Prenda Law from paying any current or future penalties imposed by the District Court, while also trying to protect its clients' interests in the few remaining cases in which Prenda Law is counsel of record."
It's true that Prenda hasn't filed any new cases in months, as Duffy emphasizes in his statements in court today. However, Duffy has been involved in sending out a new, potentially massive batch of demand letters related to porn-downloading accusations. Those letters have gone out as recently as last month under the name Anti-Piracy Law Group.
reader comments
104