Does Culpepper IP want to attack the ISPs next?

Culpepper Served Defendants

I have been speaking to a number of accused defendants who are pretty shocked about Kerry Culpepper’s most recent lawsuit in Colorado. Likely to prove that Culpepper IP’s YTS settlement demand e-mails actually have “teeth,” Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP has not only sued defendants for the copyright infringement of his movie clients’ copyrighted movies, but now he has named and served them as well.

[Please Click to Tweet!]

ANONYMITY

It is one thing to sue an accused defendant as a “John Doe” defendant. As a John Doe Defendant, the accused defendant is still anonymous. Yes, he is receiving ISP subpoena notification letters from his ISP, but the world does not yet know that he has been accused of software or movie piracy.

The “Anonymous” John Doe

As a John Doe… an ANONYMOUS John Doe, he can still interact with the plaintiff attorney (obviously better and smarter to have an attorney do it). He can have his attorney argue the legal points, he can argue whether he actually did the downloads or not, he can even negotiate a settlement of the claims against him… all while being an ANONYMOUS* John Doe.

Dangers of “Anonymous” Settlements with IP-based Lawsuits

NOTE: It’s probably a good idea to take mention that an accused John Doe Defendant is merely mentioned by his accused IP address <– the IP address his internet service provider (ISP) assigned him for the 24-48 hours that they leased that IP address to him. The danger in settling anonymously is that some copyright attorneys attempt to phrase an “anonymous” settlement as being “John Doe Subscriber assigned IP address 108.124.24.4,” meaning, one accused IP address only. If an accused downloader is a regular movie downloader, he likely has OTHER IP ADDRESSES that were assigned to him.

I wrote about “Anonymous Settlements” and in my “3 Reasons Why an Anonymous Settlement is a Bad Idea” article in September, 2020.

[While that article referenced Strike 3 Holdings, LLC lawsuits, the topic of “anonymous settlements” is still very relevant.]

It goes without saying that common sense, settling the claims against you for ONE IP ADDRESS ONLY does not automatically settle ALL claims against you for ALL IP ADDRESSES you ever had. This is something that an attorney should negotiate in an agreement (obviously using the correct terminology).

The danger of settling anonymously is that the plaintiff attorney can take your money, say thank you, and then turn around and ask for another settlement for another movie title that you downloaded. This unending spiral of events could frustrate anybody. Obviously your attorney should be aware of the ONE IP ADDRESS PROBLEM and he should consider it in his settlement release of liability.

Kerry Culpepper’s Colorado Lawsuit… where he named and served his defendants.

So back to Kerry Culpepper and his movie lawsuits. As you can see from this screenshot, Kerry Culpepper sued on behalf of Fallen Productions, Inc. for the unlawful download of their “Angel Has Fallen” movie. Pictured below is is recent Fallen Productions Inc. v. Does 1-17 (Case No. 1:20-cv-03170) lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (federal court).

031721 Culpepper IP Colorado Fallen Productions Lawsuit
Fallen Productions Inc. v. Does 1-17 (Case No. 1:20-cv-03170) filed in the District of Colorado

If you notice, Fallen Productions Inc. was included at the top of the list of another lawsuit he filed last year [2020] in the Hawaii federal court (see, Fallen Productions, Inc. et al. v. Harry B. and DOE Defendants, Case No. 1:20-cv-00004).

culpepper-ip-fallen-productions Culpepper IP and his Fallen Productions Inc. Colorado Lawsuit
Fallen Productions, Inc. et al. v. Harry B. and DOE Defendants (Case No. 1:20-cv-00004)

Copyright Trolls

I am not calling all movie companies who sue for the unlawful download, streaming, or viewing of their copyrighted movies “copyright trolls,” but when there is a pattern of lawsuits — all by a specific movie company, or as I have written about before, a conglomerate of movie companies — you must raise the question of whether this company is trying to legitimately enforce their copyright rights, or whether they are trying to make a quick “multi-thousand-dollar settlement” from each defendant… just as a copyright troll would.

Rob Cashman, Author, and owner of the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC.

Why Culpepper’s Lawsuits are Different

But again, Kerry Culpepper’s movie lawsuits are different… not because they are asking for multi-thousand-dollar settlements from each accused defendant (they are), but because of what Kerry Culpepper wants.

Kerry Culpepper does not appear to be interested in the money. Yes, a few thousand dollars sounds like a lot of money for his clients (and it is).

But it is starting to appear to me that Culpepper IP is more interested in going after the ISPs and the VPN providers. Why? Because it is the SAFE HARBOR IMMUNITY given to ISPs that I believe he is trying to break.

[Please Click to Tweet!]

ISP DMCA Safe Harbor Rules

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) “safe harbor” rules, ISPs have not been liable for infringing traffic (e.g., movie downloads) that happen on their network.

Obviously each ISP has in its terms of service (TOS) that using their network for copyright infringement is reason for the ISP to terminate that account holder’s ISP internet account. But to my awareness, they rarely [if ever] cancel their customer’s account for violations of the terms of service when that account holder downloads or streams a movie from an unauthorized website.

Why I believe Culpepper IP want to get around the DMCA Safe Harbor Rules

I understand that Kerry Culpepper is looking to circumvent the safe harbor rules and he wants to force the ISPs to cooperate with his requests.

He likely wants to do this without him needing to go to the federal court and file a “John Doe” copyright infringement lawsuit every time he learns that “some guy did something.”

Really, I understand that he just wants to contact the ISP and have them disclose the real identity of the account holder… without lawsuits… without subpoenas… without Hawaii Rule 521(h) lawsuits… and without going to court at all.

Why do I think this? Because [among other reasons I am still confirming], in his questionnaire to accused internet users, he asked, “whether or not your ISP sent you any warning notices concerning infringing activity.”

^^^ Why would he ask this? ^^^

[In Culpepper IP’s YTS e-mails], his $950 settlement demands are not merely, “pay me and I’ll decide not to sue you in federal court for copyright infringement.” No. Rather, with his settlements, he is asking accused internet users to provide a signed declaration detailing:

1) “which BitTorrent client you used to reproduce the motion picture;”

2) “which website or business promoted the BitTorrent client to you;” and

3) “whether or not your ISP sent you any warning notices concerning infringing activity.”

Reference: “The Truth about why Culpepper IP is sending settlement demand EMAILS to YTS users,” written on 9/16/2020.

What does Culpepper demonstrate from the Fallen Productions Inc. Colorado Lawsuit?

In this lawsuit in Colorado, you see that after some initial pushback from the judge on PERSONAL JURISDICTION issues, Kerry Culpepper first dismissed a few defendants (presumably those who settled), and then he turned around and NAMED AND SERVED a handful of defendants.

What can we take from this? What can a judge take from this? That Kerry Culpepper is not interested in the John Doe. He is not interested in their money. He is not even interested in their alleged infringement of his movie clients’ movies.

My thought: He wants their DATA to go after BIGGER FISH.

Again, why would he ask the three questions in his e-mail YTS settlement demand e-mails? Because Kerry Culpepper wants to look past the defendants and go after his real target — the ISPs who allow their subscribers to download films and movies on their internet networks in violation of the copyright holder’s copyright rights.

[Please Click to Tweet!]

And, Culpepper still wants “LAWFARE.”

“LAWFARE”

Understanding that Kerry Culpepper is engaging in “lawfare” (legal war) against piracy-based websites, we at the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC suggest that Culpepper is using these $950 settlement demand e-mails to build a portfolio of evidence against the piracy-based websites.[“Lawfare” is defined as using legal systems and institutions to achieve a goal. It can be the misuse of legal systems and principles against an enemy, such as by damaging or de-legitimizing them.]

Earlier this month, I wrote an article entitled, “Why Culpepper IP Is Engaging In A Takeover Of The Piracy Trade Names,” where I suggested that Kerry Culpepper is filing piracy-based trademarks as his own for the purpose of literally taking the domain names (and consequently, their traffic from the millions of internet users who visit their pages every day) and using it for his own purposes.

Reference: The Truth about why Culpepper IP is sending settlement demand EMAILS to YTS users, written on 9/16/2020 (link).

Remember also Culpepper IP’s trademark “lawfare” on Piracy Trade Names

Also, let’s not forget about why I believe that “Culpepper IP Is Engaging in a Takeover of the Piracy Trade Names.”

Again, I am just reporting here. Yes, I am aware of the hundreds, maybe thousands of accused individuals who received e-mails directly from Culpepper IP (now, no longer from Joshua, but from I believe a “Stephanie” <[email protected]>).

I still think that Culpepper has a bigger plan, and that plan is NOT the settlement or the John Doe Defendant.

[Please Click to Tweet!]

What should I do if I am NAMED AND SERVED as a defendant?

To the accused downloaders of Kerry’s Colorado case — what should you do? Well, he NAMED AND SERVED you. This means that you are no longer a “John Doe Defendant,” but you are now a “Named and Served” Defendant.

I have written a “walkthrough” article on what to do once you are named and served. I called it, “NAMED AND SERVED AS A DEFENDANT.

And for reference, this is article very different from the other “walkthrough” article I have written on what to do when you are accused of being a John Doe Defendant.

I didn’t call that one “SUED AS A JOHN DOE” (as I probably should have):
“ISP SUBPOENA NOTIFICATION RECEIVED FOR DOWNLOADING MOVIES.”

The point is — once named and served [as the defendants from the Colorado court were] — you are accused of copyright infringement for downloading one or more movies without a license.

Whether you like it or not, you are now “in litigation,” which means that you have procedural deadlines and responsibilities according to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (F.R.C.P) on what you must do next before you miss the deadline to file an answer with the court and Culpepper asks the court for a judgement against you.

Obviously, you can contact me at the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC if you have any questions.

If for some reason I won’t take you as a client, I will still happily spend time with you on the phone to answer your questions.

I will happily also refer you to an attorney in your state who is competent to represent you in this case. I have never taken a referral fee, but I still believe that even if I can’t help you — at the very least, I do my best to put you in the hands of an attorney who can help you.

And obviously I’ll lead you far away from the “settlement factory” attorneys I have written about more times than I can count.

-Robert Z. Cashman, author and owner of the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC

Public Policy Letter to Judges on Copyright Issues

Lastly, it has been quite a while since I’ve revisited the “Public Policy Letter to Judges” article that I wrote in 2012, but I wanted to take a moment and mention that this letter has been sent to judges across the US… not only by me, but by many activist individuals who have an interest in keeping copyright trolls out of the federal courts.

While the “copyright troll” lawsuits have changed somewhat since we wrote that in 2012, the copyright laws themselves and the “uneven playing field” that I describe in this letter (this link is a .pdf attachment) is still very real, and very valid.

Now, as I did almost TEN YEARS AGO, I invite you to make this letter your own and to inform judges about the problems with copyright attorneys who sue John Doe defendants for the purpose of extracting a quick settlement. You do not need to be a defendant to send this letter.

And as always, e-mail me or contact me if I can be of assistance to you.

[To follow-up on this article and see what else I have written on Kerry Culpepper, the easiest way is to simple do a search on my TorrentLawyer website for Culpepper IP and see what articles show up.]

[One last time… Please Click to Tweet!]


[CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about what I have written here (or if you have received one of these settlement demand e-mails), you can e-mail us at [email protected], you can set up a free and confidential phone consultation to speak to us about your case, or you can SMS/WhatsApp us at 713-364-3476 (this is our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC’s number].

CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it for my eyes only, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

    NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

    The Truth about why Culpepper IP is sending settlement demand EMAILS to YTS users.

    culpepper-settlement-demand-emails

    Kerry Culpepper of Culpeper IP has achieved the impossible. He has figured out a way how to send Settlement Demand Emails to internet users who are accused of downloading his clients’ copyrighted movies. He has accomplished this without a copyright infringement movie lawsuit, without a Hawaii Rule 521(h) subpoena, and without asking Cloudfront or Google Analytics to hand over the IP address information.

    Instead, he simply got YTS to hand over the IP address logs and e-mail addresses of those who registered with the YTS websites!

    [Please Click to Tweet!]

    How is Culpepper IP sending settlement demand emails without a lawsuit and without an ISP subpoena?

    Accused internet users who are receiving settlement demand letters from Joshua Lee (a first year associate working for Culpepper) at-least-once went onto the YTS.LT and YTS.AM (“YTS”) websites and registered accounts with them using their real e-mail address (how much do you trust your piracy bittorrent-based website now?). THIS appears to be how he has been able to send them settlement demand letters without any courts, no judge oversight, no subpoenas, and no lawsuits.

    joshua-lee-culpepper-ip-settlement-demand-emails
    AchinVerma / Pixabay

    Why did I refer to Culpepper IP’s settlement demand letters as being in an “Ashley Madison” / “Pornhub” fashion?

    ASHLEY MADISON HACK (2015)

    The Ashley Madison hack was pretty horrible for those who were exposed by the hack. Many married men and women signed up for the site [and paid a membership fee] using their REAL NAME, E-MAIL ADDRESS, and CREDIT CARD INFORMATION.

    When the Ashley Madison hack happened in 2015, hackers stole their database containing 32 million people who used their website. No doubt this ended many marriages (which were probably over anyway), but it demonstrated to the internet world that your private information isn’t private if the website you are trusting with your personal information turns that information over to nefarious individuals.

    PORNHUB LAWSUIT (2017)

    Similarly, in 2017, Pornhub was forced by a judge to provide the names, e-mail addresses, IP addresses, and other data exposing the identity of uploaders of pirated videos.  Again, from the Pornhub Lawsuit, we learned that we CAN get caught viewing streamed Tube-like videos.

    NOW THE YTS STORY (2020)

    The YTS 2020 story is a bit different. The visitors to the bittorrent website registered their real e-mail addresses and proceeded to download copyrighted films using bittorrent. Registered users again trusted their private information with the website and again, they have been betrayed.

    Here, YTS provided IP address logs containing their user’s information to Culpepper IP, and as we expected, the settlement demand letters have started to go out.

    Is Kerry Culpepper evil? Likely not.

    Many would likely disagree with me here, but what Kerry Culpepper (and Joshua Lee, a first year associate under Culpepper’s direction) of Culpepper IP are doing on the surface appears to be merely two attorneys who are fighting piracy of their client’s films.

    SETTLEMENT LETTERS “CHEAP” COMPARED TO HIS LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT AMOUNTS.

    The settlement demand letters being sent out by Joshua Lee of Culpepper IP are not that expensive. They are asking for a settlement of $950. While $950 is no doubt a lot of money to many people, putting the settlement amount in context to the many thousands of dollars Culpepper has asked for in the past for one title, $950 is a bargain.

    THESE $950 SETTLEMENTS *DO* COME WITH “STRINGS.”

    What is noteworthy is that the $950 settlement comes with strings. As I have written many times already, Kerry Culpepper is a complicated attorney who thinks “at levels higher than the average person.” Without going into details, Culpepper is always thinking about the next step.

    Here, his $950 settlements are not merely, “pay me and I’ll decide not to sue you in federal court for copyright infringement.” No. Rather, with his settlements, he is asking accused internet users to provide a signed declaration detailing:

    1. “which BitTorrent client you used to reproduce the motion picture;”
    2. “which website or business promoted the BitTorrent client to you;” and
    3. “whether or not your ISP sent you any warning notices concerning infringing activity.”

    “LAWFARE”

    Understanding that Kerry Culpepper is engaging in “lawfare” (legal war) against piracy-based websites, we at the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC suggest that Culpepper is using these $950 settlement demand e-mails to build a portfolio of evidence against the piracy-based websites.

    [“Lawfare” is defined as using legal systems and institutions to achieve a goal. It can be the misuse of legal systems and principles against an enemy, such as by damaging or de-legitimizing them.]

    Earlier this month, I wrote an article entitled, “Why Culpepper IP Is Engaging In A Takeover Of The Piracy Trade Names,” where I suggested that Kerry Culpepper is filing piracy-based trademarks as his own for the purpose of literally taking the domain names (and consequently, their traffic from the millions of internet users who visit their pages every day) and using it for his own purposes.

    LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS

    While I never know what Culpepper is doing, I can come to logical conclusions by simply looked at what he is asking for:

    “which BitTorrent client…” — this provides data and evidence which he can use against the bittorrent companies.

    “which website or business promoted the BitTorrent client to you…” — this provides evidence to allow him to go after companies like ShowBox, PopcornTime, and various websites and apps [all of whom have millions of users and who produce million of DOLLARS in ad revenue].

    “whether or not your ISP sent you any warning notices concerning infringing activity.” — this is a dangerous one. ISPs have “safe harbor” rules which prevent them from being sued for activities that users engage in using their networks. However, it appears to me as if Kerry Culpepper intends to start suing the ISPs… which is BIG BUCKS for his movie clients if he succeeds.

    OR, MAYBE NOT.

    Obviously I could be thinking too much into all of this. Kerry Culpepper could just be an evil copyright troll who is trying to find new ways to make a quick buck for the least amount of effort… However, with all of his activities against YTS / 1337x.to, the trademark filings, and whatever else he has been doing, the simple answer is probably the one that wins out.

    KERRY CULPEPPER HAS BIG PLANS.

    settlement-demand-emails-joshua-lee-culpepper-ip
    Matryx / Pixabay

    [To follow-up on this article and see what else I have written on Kerry Culpepper, the easiest way is to simple do a search on my TorrentLawyer website for Culpepper IP and see what articles show up.]

    [Please Click to Tweet!]


    [CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about what I have written here (or if you have received one of these settlement demand e-mails), you can e-mail us at [email protected], you can set up a free and confidential phone consultation to speak to us about your case, or you can SMS/WhatsApp us at 713-364-3476 (this is our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC’s number].

    CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it for my eyes only, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

      NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

      VIXEN – Not to be confused with a rock band, clothing line.

      strike-3-holdings-anonymous-settlement-vixen-blacked-tushy-deeper

      If you are here looking for VIXEN GROUP videos, you came to the wrong place. BUT *PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO READ THIS BEFORE CONTINUING TO YOUR VIXEN ADULT FILM VIDEO*. Vixen, along with Tushy, Blacked, and “Deeper.” are all website porn brands belonging to Strike 3 Holdings, LLC.

      If you are looking for the Vixen music band – the all-female rock band from the 80’s. They can be found at VixenOfficial.com.

      The Vixen Music Band also has a Vixen All-Female Rock Band Facebook Page.

      vixen-micheline-pitt-clothing-website

      MICHELINE PITT, HER CLOTHING LINE, AND RAINN

      On the topic of VIXEN PORN VIDEOS, there is a woman named Micheline Pitt who started a clothing line (more on this in a second). Pornography videos often scenes of abuse, sexual assault, or even rape, and I am happy to see that she is taking a stand against these.

      Micheline Pitt has started a campaign #VIXENNOTAVICTIM to bring awareness to survivors of sexual assault, rape, and abuse. For every piece of clothing that you purchase, Micheline Pitt will donate 30%-40% (or more) to RAINN to help survivors and prevent sexual violence.

      If you came here looking for Vixen porn, I am not “guilting you” into buying her clothing or making a contribution to RAINN (the “Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network”), but yeah — if you are providing clicks and ad revenue to the porn industry, at least spend a few dollars balancing things out and donating to RAINN or buying Micheline Pitt’s clothing.

      Just so it is said, Micheline Pitt’s website sells an interesting line of clothing called “VIXEN BY MICHELINE PITT,” which has “GOOD THINGS FOR BAD GIRLS – SIZES XS – 4X.” Her clothing lines include “PET SEMATARY,” “THIS IS HALLOWEEN,” “FLORAL AFFAIR,” and probably a number of others that I have not seen.

      In short, if you are watching Vixen porn videos, put some balance into the world and donate money or buy products which benefit those who are hurt and who have their lives ruined by the porn industry.

      WHERE TO FIND LEGAL AND LEGITIMATE VIXEN PORN VIDEOS

      If you are actually looking for Vixen porn videos (e.g., VIXEN GROUP adult film videos related to the Vixen Blacked, Tushy, and Deeper. brand names), you do not need to go to illegal sources which can get you sued.

      If you are looking for the VIXEN GROUP, the “legal” and legitimate source of the Vixen porn videos which will not get you sued, then click here.

      Vixen porn videos (along with the Tushy, Blacked, and “Deeper.” porn video brands) all belong to the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC copyright troll company. I am the owner of the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC and the TorrentLawyer.com website. I have been watching being getting sued almost daily for viewing these adult film videos since March, 2017.

      So please, do not become a victim of Strike 3 Holdings by downloading their Vixen, Blacked, Tushy, or Deeper. branded films… NOT from illegal sources (where you can provide them ad revenue), and NOT from legal sources by paying for their content.

      HOW DO THOSE WHO WATCH VIXEN PORN VIDEOS GET CAUGHT AND SUED?

      Those who watch porn videos usually get caught by downloading the videos using bittorrent software. “Tushy,” “Blacked,” and now “Deeper.” are all video brands owned by Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, and can be found [think, were LEAKED AND ARE MONITORED BY COPYRIGHT TROLLS] on the bittorrent websites.

      I don’t care which software you use: Bittorrent, uTorrent, Transmission, Vuze (Azurus), or any other software that uses BitTorrent.

      You visit a website, whether it is 1137x.to (or 1337x.gd), The Pirate Bay, or any other website that allows you to browse adult film torrents and download Vixen mp4 xxx files, you click on a link, and open up your bittorrent software and download the Vixen mp4 xxx movies. THAT is how you get caught downloding their porn videos.

      WHAT ABOUT THE TUBE WEBSITES WHERE I CAN STREAM VIXEN PORN VIDEOS?

      For many years, I was of the opinion that you would not get sued for viewing porn videos using the YouTube-like websites.

      Vixen porn videos (along with Tushy, Blacked, and “Deeper.” branded videos) are illegally shared on the internet using YouTube-like websites. I do not need to name them, because no doubt you can find them.

      Notably, however, are the Pornhub lawsuits where users using the Pornhub.com website to view Vixen, Tushy, or Blacked films were exposed and sued for copyright infringement.

      [I learned about in the context of analyzing whether someone can get caught for using the Kodi software, and more specifically, whether someone can get sued for putting Kodi software on an Amazon Firestick.]

      CAUGHT (MONITORED) BUT NOT SUED

      I believed that you could get caught watching porn videos [like Blacked, Tushy, Deeper., etc.] either through a plaintiff attorney sending a subpoena to Google Analytics, Cloudfront, or any other website plug-in company that tracks the IP address and activities of users who visit their site (be careful what trackers your Tube-like porn streaming sites use).

      However, once the plaintiff attorney gets the list of IP addresses of the Blacked porn site viewers, the plaintiff attorneys then needed to take the extra inconvenient step of filing one or more copyright infringement lawsuit in federal courts against “John Doe” defendants (the Blacked porn video viewers) who were assigned that particular IP address at that date and time.

      They would ask the court for “Expedited Discovery” (FRCP Rule 26), and then they would send subpoenas to Internet Service Providers (ISPs) forcing them to hand over the identities of their subscribers who viewed the Blacked or Tushy videos — their IP addresses would be the ones they were assigned on the dates and time they viewed or streamed the Blacked / Tushy / Vixen videos. Those porn video viewers would receive ISP Subpoena Notification Letters letting them know that they have been sued as a “John Doe” defendant in their copyright infringement lawsuit.

      Once the plaintiff attorney received the Blacked / Tushy / Vixen website visitor’s identities (which really were merely the account holders’ identities) from their ISPs, only then can the adult film Copyright Trolls (Strike 3 Holdings, LLC) begin to engage in the extortion portion of what is an elaborate settlement extortion scheme (settle for thousands or dollars or else we will NAME AND SERVE you in the federal court lawsuit).

      TECHNOLOGY ADVANCES AND LEGAL LOOPHOLES MADE MONITORING VIXEN PORN VIEWERS’ ACTIVITIES POSSIBLE.

      Creative plaintiff attorneys have found loopholes in the legal system to shortcut the “Expedited Discovery” two-step method of obtaining the identities of Vixen porn video watchers who visited a website and exposed their IP address causing them to be caught and sued.

      Instead of suing for copyright infringement in the federal courts, they sue in state courts (such as the Miami-Dade, Florida county court, the Maricopa, Arizona county court, or even St. Clair, Illinois county court). They sue using quasi-legal theories, such as equity or Bill of Discovery, and they ask the state or county court to reveal the identity of those accused of viewing, streaming, or downloading their client’s copyrighted videos.

      With the Blacked / Tushy / Vixen adult videos, VIXEN GROUP’s own Florida attorneys — Rachel Walker & Tyler Mamone — engaged in this kind of state-based lawsuit with their Miami-Dade County, Florida Bill of Discovery Strike 3 Holdings, LLC lawsuits. This is an ongoing problem for those who viewed or streamed Vixen, Tushy, Blacked, or most recently, “Deeper.” videos without a license.

      Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP (who appears to represent the conglomerate of movie companies who sue defendants for the copyright infringement of their lawsuits) skirted the federal courts as well. Culpepper did this by suing accused downloaders and exposing their identities using Hawaii’s Rule 512(h) rules.

      Most recently, Culpepper sent subpoenas to Cloudfront to determine which IP addresses viewed his movie clients’ films without a license.

      * 9/16/2020 UPDATE *: Attorney Joshua Lee of Culpepper IP appears to be the attorney who is now working for Kerry Culpepper. Joshua Lee is also the name which is appearing on many of the Culpepper IP settlement demand letters.

      ADDICTION TO PORNOGRAPHY HELPLINES

      Nobody likes to talk about this topic, but it if nobody mentions it, you as the adult film viewer might not be aware of the problem.

      There *is* such thing as having an addition to pornography. Major sources have spoken about pornography addiction (albeit in a boring, medical kind of way), and popular groups such as Reddit’s “No-Fap” Support Group has been a great way to speak to others about what you might be going through.

      Other more formal groups include “Sexaholics Anonymous” (sa.org) or “Recoveries Anonymous” (r-a.org).

      As soon as you start spending losing hours at your computer viewing adult film websites, you might have a problem. Once your adult film viewing habits start interfering with your work and your everyday life (e.g., effects from lack of sleep, or relationship problems and the like), you might have a problem.

      Bottom line, pornography addiction is essentially a dopamine addiction where the affected person seeks a “dopamine high” which they get from pornography. It must be noted that other activities, e.g., running, sex, relationships, parenting, movies, etc. also provide dopamine highs as well.

      If you suspect you might need help for such a pornography addiction, then by all means, reach out to one of these groups. For privacy purposes, I might just create a fake account on reddit.com so that I can get help without pasting my name everywhere on my posts, but the official groups are set up to preserve your privacy and your anonymity as well.

      IN SUMMARY:

      OK, so you came here looking for Blacked / Tushy / Vixen pornography videos. I hope I have given you a few things to think about along the way.

      As an attorney and the owner of the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC, I support my family by representing clients who are sued by copyright trolls. This being said, if I could save you from being my client by NOT being sued in the first place, I would be just as happy with the result.

      If I could inspire you to take actions to heal the damage that pornography viewing causes — either through getting help through Reddit’s Pornography Addiction resources, by buying clothing and supporting companies like VIXEN BY MICHELINE PITT, or by outright making donations to RAINN (the “Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network”), you will help to take a stand against sexual abuse, sexual assault, or even rape.

      Lastly, no doubt YOU YOURSELF might not engage in these acts and your adult film viewing habits might be innocent, you cannot deny that there are others that watch pornography, and act out the abuse, sex acts, or rapes on those around them, willing or not.

      Whether it is the adult films (the pornography) which is to blame or those who engage in violent acts against others, by watching pornography YOU MUST CONSIDER that you give financial benefit (in the form of power, ad revenue, and sometimes outright cash) to the pornography industry by watching porn videos, legal or not.

      What you do with this information is up to you. Let’s hope you never need my services as an attorney.


      [CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about what I have written here, you can e-mail us at info[at]cashmanlawfirm.com, you can set up a free and confidential phone consultation to speak to us about your situation, or you can call us at 713-364-3476 (this is our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC’s number].

      CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it for my eyes only, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

        NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

        Why Culpepper IP Is Engaging In A Takeover Of The Piracy Trade Names.

        Pornhub lawsuit exposes the dangers of Google Analytics

        I just learned that Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP just filed the RARBG trademark — probably with the intent of suing the 10+ year old RARBG website for trademark infringement. How do I *NOT* comment on an underhanded action like this?!?

        I have been speaking about “copyright trolls” for over 10 years — Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP certainly has been the subject of our articles for many years now.

        …Whether Kerry Culpepper is suing internet users who use bittorrent on their computers to view, stream, or download copyrighted movies belonging to his movie clients… or

        whether his Culpepper IP law firm is suing CELL PHONE USERS for streaming movies using piracy apps…

        or whether Kerry Culpepper is using Hawaii’s Rule 512(h) to skirt the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure’s expedited discovery rules and expose the identities of ISP subscribers

        or whether his Culpepper IP is suing YTS / 133x.to bittorrent trackers and/or piracy websites

        or whether Culpepper is sending subpoenas to Cloudfront to determine which IP addresses viewed his movie clients’ films without a license (because like Google Analytics, Cloudfront tracks which IP addresses visit which sites)…

        Culpepper IP is the Hawaii-based law firm which is sending letters to internet users accused of VISITING a particular website, and downloading a movie which is copyrighted by his clients.

        * 9/16/2020 UPDATE *: Joshua Lee of Culpepper IP is a first year associate working under Kerry Culpepper’s direction. Joshua Lee is also the name which is appearing on many of the Culpepper IP settlement demand letters, so I am mentioning him here.

        CULPEPPER IP TRADEMARKS NOW FILED IN THE NAMES OF PIRACY WEBSITES

        Now Kerry Culpepper is filing Culpepper IP trademarks which directly conflict with the names of piracy-based websites, companies, and bittorrent trackers.

        To accomplish these new Culpepper IP trademarks, Culpepper is claiming that the piracy websites are not using the trademarked named in a way that can be recognized by the US Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) as lawful use.

        “Culpepper IP Trademark Claim: [The trademarked name] is not lawful use in commerce because the use of RARBG by the piracy websites is unlawful under federal law.”

        MY THOUGHTS ON CULPEPPER IP TRADEMARKS:

        As a registered patent attorney who has followed the rulings of the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) my entire law career, I absolutely MUST have faith that the USPTO’s Trademark Application examiners will see that Culpepper IP trademarks are merely an attempt to engage in a settlement negotiations against accused internet users in the federal courts.

        *9/17 UPDATE* – Alternatively, it has recently occurred to me that the Culpepper IP trademarks of the piracy website names will be used by Culpepper to take over the DOMAIN NAMES of the piracy-based websites. With millions of visitors each day, that kind of traffic can be worth millions of dollars to Culpepper and his clients, if only considering ad revenue.

        If he takes over the websites and diverts the traffic to begin PAYING for lawful copies of the copyrighted content, e.g., in a movie subscription-based service, again, this could be worth millions of dollars to Culpepper and his clients.

        kerry-culpepper-ip-trademarks Kerry Culpepper IP trademarks

        “A TRADEMARK APPLICANT STILL CAN REGISTER AN APPLE TRADEMARK AS LONG AS IT IS NOT IN AN AREA OF PRACTICE COVERED BY APPLE, INC.”

        I’ll say that again. A trademark applicant can still register the APPLE trademark name, even though Apple, Inc. already owns the APPLE trademark.

        How is this possible, you might ask? All trademark applications must include “Trademark Classes.” These trademark classes identify in what area the business or trade intending to use the trademark will be using the mark (trademark).

        Thus, if you are starting an “Apple” cleaning business where you intend to send your maid cleaning services to clean people’s homes, well, you are allowed to use the APPLE trade name.

        LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION

        To determine whether the applied-for trademark conflicts with (or “infringes upon”) an already trademarked name, the USPTO trademark application examiner will ask whether there is a “likelihood of confusion” between the already trademarked mark and the newly applied for trademark.

        In other words, if someone buying your APPLE cleaning services might think that you are affiliated with Apple, Inc. — the APPLE trademark holder who sells APPLE COMPUTER PRODUCTS, PHONES, …and the expanding list of everything else they do, well then your APPLE trademark application will be rejected.

        WHY CULPEPPER IP TRADEMARKS MIGHT FAIL

        Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP is also a patent attorney, meaning by definition that he likely also knows the “soft intellectual property” laws and rules cold. Thus, his Culpepper IP trademarks no doubt are following the trademark rules.

        If I were in Kerry Culpepper’s shoes and I was a “crafty” attorney, I would make sure that my Culpepper IP trademarks will claim to be a business PRACTICING IN AN AREA THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM and CANNOT BE CONFUSED WITH the piracy-based websites I intend on using for whatever profit motive Culpepper IP trademarks have in mind. Thus, I would use TRADEMARK CLASSES in my Culpepper IP trademarks that have nothing to do with what the piracy-based bittorrent websites are using.

        But Kerry Culpepper is brazen. Thus his Culpepper IP trademarks approach is also brazen.

        His Culpepper IP Trademarks list the TRADEMARK CLASS as “Downloadable computer software for downloading and streaming multimedia content images, videos and audio.” …EXACTLY what the piracy-based websites are doing.

        KERRY CULPEPPER IS ENGAGING IN A TAKEOVER OF THE PIRACY TRADE NAMES.

        In other words, his Culpepper IP trademarks campaign is engaging in a “legal takeover” of the RARBG TRADE NAME.

        Instead of claiming a different TRADEMARK CLASS, Kerry Culpepper is claiming the IDENTICAL business as the piracy websites are using. He is doing so by claiming that these piracy-based websites have absolutely no trademark rights because by definition, their operations are illegal (because they engage in copyright infringement).

        In other words, the anti-theft anti-piracy lawyer is “stealing” the trade names of piracy based websites and bittorrent trackers.

        WHAT CULPEPPER LIKELY PLANS TO DO IF HE SUCEEDS WITH HIS TRADEMARK FILINGS.

        Again, Kerry Culpepper is crafty, wicked smart (in a bad way), and is always many chess moves ahead of his opponents. I have no doubt that he is doing this for a very specific set of purposes.

        WHETHER KERRY CULPEPPER SUCCEEDS OR WHETHER HE FAILS, THIS AND THIS (SUCCESS *AND* FAILURE) ARE LIKELY BOTH HIS PLAN.

        IF CULPEPPER SUCCEEDS:

        IF CULPEPPER SUCCEEDS: If Kerry Culpepper and his Culpepper IP trademarks succeed in getting the piracy-based trademarks awarded to him, he will no doubt try to take over the RARBG domain names (along with the YTS and 133x.to domain names) claiming that he is the rightful trademark owner of them.

        By taking over the domain names, he will automatically gain the viewership of MILLIONS of internet users WHO WANT TO SEE THE MOVIE CONTENT his RARBG replacement website will happily provide them… legitimate lawful movie content for a per-title-fee or a monthly subscription.

        In other words, his Culpepper IP trademarks mission would be to convert MILLIONS OF PIRATES INTO PAYING CUSTOMERS. Is it no surprise that 42 Ventures lists Kerry Culpepper as the Director of this enterprise?

        [And unrelated, I cannot help but to think that 42 Ventures, LLC is the very COMMON COPYRIGHT TROLL entity that I have been writing about for so many years now?! Think, 42+ movie companies who are interested in shaking down those who view their copyrighted content without a license.]

        WHEN HE WINS, THE REAL PAIN WILL BEGIN

        Once Kerry Culpepper wins the rights to the trademark, then the real enforcement will no doubt begin. [Can a scorpion change its nature to sting?]

        I have no doubt that if his Culpepper IP trademarks campaign succeeds in getting awarded the trademarks, he will then approach the piracy-based website owners [who will likely be ignorant of the laws and will continue to use their trade name] and he will have them settle his claims against them for millions of dollars.

        He will then go after their internet users. He will obtain subpoenas to determine who the ISP internet subscribers are who were assigned that IP address visiting the piracy-based website [to which he now owns the trademark for], and he will assert copyright infringement and trademark infringement claims against each-and-every internet user who uses his newly-trademarked name.

        He could then ask for thousands of dollars from each internet user, and he could sue the ones who do not settle (or purchase his new services) in federal courts across the US.

        IF CULPEPPER FAILS:

        IF CULPEPPER FAILS: If Kerry Culpepper fails in getting the piracy-based Culpepper IP trademarks awarded to him, he will either change his approach [e.g., by claiming a DIFFERENT TRADE CLASS] and he will re-submit his trademark application and try again.

        Or, he will continue to go after internet users who visit the piracy-based websites. He will obtain subpoenas to ask Google Analytics or Cloudfront to share the IP address of the various users who visited the sites where his client’s movies were downloaded. He will then obtain their identity by determining who the ISP internet subscribers are who were assigned that IP address visiting the piracy-based website.

        Once he applies this two-step solution, he will assert copyright infringement against each-and-every internet user who visits the piracy page of his client’s copyrighted movie titles.

        ALTERNATIVELY:

        ALTERNATIVELY: Honestly, I do not know. When I wrote the article in 2017 explaining that a copyright troll can obtain the IP address of those internet users who visit their client’s copyrighted site using Google Analytics (or now, Cloudfront), I did not anticipate that an attorney would actually do this.

        There are so many thousands of users that STILL use bittorrent to download pirated movies, and the federal courts across the US are still happily entertaining bittorrent-based copyright infringement lawsuits (well, if I recall, not necessarily in Hawaii where Culpepper is located).

        Thus, the whole two-step approach [of 1) obtaining the IP address of the internet user who visited the piracy-based website by sending a subpoena to Google Analytics or Cloudfront, and then 2) sending a subpoena to the ISP to determine the identity of the IP address account holder who was assigned the IP address on that particular time] seemed extremely inconvenient. I actually thought it was prohibitive at the time, so I did not think it would be done.

        But Kerry Culpepper’s focus has not been only the end-users who viewed his client’s copyrighted titles without a license, but if I understand correctly, his focus is on soliciting multi-million dollar settlements from the piracy website owners, the seeders/uploaders of the copyrighted content, and those hosting the bittorrent trackers on their websites. In other words, the deep pockets. End-user internet users are merely a secondary “dessert.”

        THE UNKNOWN:

        THE UNKNOWN: I must also make mention that I honestly do not know what Kerry Culpepper is ever up to. As I mentioned above, he is wicked smart, and while he is brazen and makes no secrets as to what he intends to do, I can never figure out what the next FIVE OR TEN STEPS ARE that he has in mind. Because again, like a chess player, my experience in watching him over the years is that he is always thinking many steps ahead of his opponent.

        Thus, I *must* assume that his most recent trademark filings have plans for both IF HE SUCCEEDS and IF HE FAILS.

        I must assume that Culpepper has a plan why he wants to be rejected by the USPTO trademark examiner, e.g., so that he can USE that rejection AGAINST SOMEONE for some purpose he has already thought of (but that I cannot figure out).

        [Please Click to Tweet!]


        [CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about what I have written here, you can e-mail us at info[at]cashmanlawfirm.com, you can set up a free and confidential phone consultation to speak to us about your DMCA settlement letter, subpoena, or lawsuit, or you can call us at 713-364-3476 (this is our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC’s number].

        CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it for my eyes only, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

          NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

          Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys and their personalities.

          strike-3-holdings-anonymous-settlement

          Why knowing which Strike 3 Holdings attorneys are filing the lawsuit against you is relevant to your case.

          Strike 3 Holdings attorneys work together as cogs in a wheel to run what our Cashman Law Firm LLC calls a “quasi-legitimate settlement extortion scheme.” As far as the public is concerned, each Strike 3 Holdings attorney appears to work independently and appears to have autonomy to make decisions on how to run the copyright infringement cases federal court cases. However, based on my observations, there are attorneys who have authority to direct their own cases, and there are attorneys who appear to read scripts to accused defendants and file boilerplate documents in the federal courts when moving their cookie-cutter lawsuits against hundreds of John Doe defendants through the federal court system.

          strike-3-holdings-attorneys-personalities Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys Personality
          3dman_eu / Pixabay

          Strike 3 Holdings attorneys come in two flavors.

          Strike 3 Holdings attorneys appear to come in two flavors:

          “Bosses”: There are Strike 3 Holdings attorney “bosses” (which are attorneys who have been running the settlement extortion scheme and the lawsuits for years now).

          “Underlings”: There are Strike 3 Holdings attorneys which are “underlings” (which are newer attorneys who have been hired by Strike 3 to be a “warm body” in a federal court.

          While I understand that in all cases, the more experienced Strike 3 attorneys appear to control the lawsuits, albeit “in the shadows.” I wrote about this in the article, “Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys in Miami-Dade County, Florida Have a ‘Behind the Scenes Shadow'” article in January, 2020).

          The former “boss” of all of the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys was Lincoln Bandlow.

          For many years, Lincoln Bandlow (formerly of Fox Rothschild LLP) ran each and every Strike 3 Holdings, LLC lawsuit filed across the US. I understand that his network used to be separated into “teams” of attorneys, although which Strike 3 Holdings attorneys were on what “team” remains unknown to me.

          My best guess is that each team was presumably separated by region — each geographic area of the US had a different “team”; although I would not be shocked if the “teams” were separated by hierarchy (like a pyramid). This way, those with decision-making power would be on one team, and those “underlings” who are merely reading scripts and following orders are in another team.

          Why I think Strike 3 Holdings LLC now has multiple bosses.

          Interestingly enough, as of May, 2019, I no longer think that there is one “boss” or “kingpin” running all of the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC lawsuits, but TWO. In May, 2019, I started to notice that the wrong Strike 3 Holdings attorneys were listed on the various court filings across the US. One of their Strike 3 Holdings attorneys would be listed as the attorney-of-record, but another attorney would be the one handling the case.

          What was more interesting is that while Lincoln Bandlow [originally] was running everything, I noticed that a growing select number of attorneys [like Jacqueline James (Jackie James)] exerted authority over their cases in the form of making on-the-spot decisions where in the past, they would need to always “consult their client” and get back to me (meaning, they would check with Lincoln to get his authority or permission to agree to something I was pushing for a particular client of mine).

          I noticed the same thing with John Atkin, who first worked for Fox Rothschild LLP (apparently as an “underling”) handling their New Jersey cases. But then, John Atkin left Fox Rothschild LLP and formed his own law firm, “The Atkin Firm, LLC.” That same day, based on my interactions with him, he began to manage his cases as if he were a “boss,” making decisions on-the-spot and deciding the direction of his own cases.

          I discussed this shake-up of Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in an article that even one year later is still an interesting read because the players are still the same people.

          I created this page so that you can look up the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys who sued you so that you can know their personality.

          For now, I am creating this page with the intention of identifying which Strike 3 Holdings attorneys are operating in which states, so that [over time; I will edit this page again with updates] you will be able to come back here and look up the attorney who sued you in your home state’s federal court.

          A Quick Note About Strike 3 Holdings State-Based Lawsuits (and why I think they will be filing in Arizona next).

          NOTEWORTHY SIDE COMMENT: Since 2019, Strike 3 Holdings attorneys have also been suing defendants in state and county courts, such as the Miami-Dade County, Florida court. These lawsuits are NOT copyright infringement lawsuits, and no claims are asserted against each John Doe Defendant implicated in their lawsuits. However, because the threat is that “we will identify the accused infringer and sue him or her in the federal court in which he lives,” (my quote referring to them, not their actual words), these state-based Bill of Discovery lawsuits are concerning because they expose each possible defendant to Strike 3 Holdings and their forced-settlement extortion scheme.

          This is not the first time a copyright troll such as Strike 3 Holdings, LLC tried this tactic of suing defendants in state courts under that state’s Bill of Discovery laws. Other former prolific copyright trolls have sued defendants in Maricopa County, Arizona as well as Miami-Dade, FL. [Arizona is where Strike 3 will probably be going next once they exhaust the “Miami-Dade Bill of Discovery” lawsuit campaign they have been running since late 2019].

          List of Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys by State

          Here is a list of Strike 3 Holdings attorneys for each state in which they are currently suing defendants:

          Miami-Dade County, Florida
          There are two known Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in Miami-Dade, Florida. Rachel Walker, and Tyler Mamone. In January, 2020, I wrote that Rachel Walker and Tyler Mamone were not the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys with apparent authority to decide the fate of each accused John Doe defendant, but rather, Lincoln Bandlow was the one apparently running the cases behind the scenes.

          More recently, it appears to me as if these Strike 3 Holdings attorneys *are* running the Miami-Dade, Florida cases, but where a defendant lives in a different location, e.g., they live in New York or Connecticut where Jackie James is “in charge” of that region, the case is handed off to Jackie James, and so on.

          For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the currently open Miami-Dade County Strike 3 Holdings cases:

          Local Case Numbers (open cases): 2020-016660-CC-05, 2020-016669-CC-05, 2020-016577-CC-05, 2020-014518-CC-05, 2020-014520-CC-05, 2020-014481-CC-05, 2020-012478-CC-05, 2020-011743-CC-05, 2020-011744-CC-05, 2020-011499-CC-05, 2020-009492-CC-05, 2020-009491-CC-05, 2020-009493-CC-05, 2020-005388-CC-05, 2020-003890-CC-05, 2020-003891-CC-05, 2020-003737-CC-05, 2020-002968-CC-05, 2020-002019-CC-05, 2020-002021-CC-05, 2020-001616-CC-05, 2019-032919-CC-05, 2019-032825-CC-05, 2019-026368-CC-05, 2019-024647-CC-05.

          California
          California Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Lincoln Bandlow of Bandlow Law.

          As you have read above, Lincoln Bandlow used to work for Fox Rothschild, LLP, where he ran all of the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys and their cases across the US. But since the shake-up May, 2019, he left Fox Rothschild, LLP and started his own law firm.

          I still think that Lincoln is behind the scenes running each of the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases filed across the US, but I no longer think he has sole authority and decision-making power. I believe that John Atkin (NJ) and Jackie James (NY/CT) also have similar power and authority.

          For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings California cases:

          CALIFORNIA STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

          Strike 3 Holdings California Central District Court

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe infringer identified as using IP address 107.184.92.94 (Case No. 2:20-cv-07421)
          v. John Doe infringer identified as using IP address 172.89.57.72 (Case No. 8:20-cv-01520)
          v. John Doe infringer identified as using IP address 104.173.206.190 (Case No. 2:20-cv-07416)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.174.118.71 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06262
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 45.48.164.4 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06261)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.87.197.120 (Case No. 5:20-cv-01393)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 172.250.76.115 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06260)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 137.25.32.101 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06808)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 108.185.19.186 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06807)

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          Strike 3 Holdings California Northern District Court

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.103.236.62 (Case No. 3:20-cv-04710)
          v. John Doe infringer* identified as using IP address 174.62.95.35 (Case No. 3:20-cv-04709)
          v. John Doe infringer* identified as using IP address 174.62.95.35 (Case No. 4:20-cv-04709)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.169.103.145 (Case No. 5:20-cv-05221)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.150.134.57 (Case No. 3:20-cv-05220)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.150.134.57 (Case No. 4:20-cv-05220)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.169.103.145 (Case No. 4:20-cv-05221)
          v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.176.167.14 (Case No. 3:20-cv-01325)

          *[NOTE TO SELF: “Is there a difference between a “John Doe Subscriber” and a “John Doe infringer? No, but the title of being accused as “John Doe infringer” is funny, and here is why.]

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          Strike 3 Holdings California Southern District Court

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.176.167.14 (Case No. 3:20-cv-01325)

          …Interestingly, not much going on in the California Southern District Court.

          Connecticut
          Connecticut Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Jacqueline M. James (Jackie James) of The James Law Firm, PLLC.

          Jacqueline James used to represent Malibu Media, LLC, another prolific copyright troll. Jackie was in charge of all of the Malibu Media, LLC cases filed in the New York federal courts.

          I consider Jacqueline James to be a “boss” when categorizing her among the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in the hierarchy.

          Jaqueline James at one point was an important attorney filing many cases for Malibu Media, LLC. She even stayed with them after there was a shake-up of Malibu Media, LLC attorneys, but then one day she stopped filing for them.

          It is important to note that Jackie James stopped representing Malibu Media, LLC because she dropped them as a client. She did not “swing from one branch to the next” by dropping one client in favor of a more profitable one. When she dropped Malibu Media, LLC as a client, she did not have another client.

          It was only later that [I presume] Strike 3 Holdings contacted her and asked her to file copyright infringement lawsuits on their behalf.

          Today, she appears to have independent authority and control of her cases, and she is in charge of the Strike 3 Holdings federal court lawsuits filed in New York and more recently, in Connecticut.

          When negotiating cases, Jackie James is known to be a difficult negotiator, but she is also fair. Be prepared to support everything you say with facts and if needed, documentation. Jackie James is the kind of attorney who does not simply take statements at face value, but she asks questions and follow-up questions… often which lead to uncomfortable conversations. Again, however, she is not known to gouge on settlement prices, but she is a tough in her approach.

          For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings Connecticut cases:

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 3:20-cv-01157, 3:20-cv-00961, and 3:20-cv-00960)

          …These are newer cases, and the judge has not yet been assigned for these. I’m guessing Jackie James will be the plaintiff attorney in each of these.

          UPDATE: I am happy to share that while searching for Dawn Sciarrino (when writing up the Virginia cases), I could not understand why she would take Strike 3 Holdings, LLC as a client. However, searching for her, I found that Jackie James actually listed her as an attorney under her law firm. While I will post Dawn’s page under her state, because her we are discussing Jackie, you can find Jacqueline James’ profile and website here.

          New Jersey
          New Jersey Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by John Atkin of The Atkin Firm, LLC.

          John Atkin used to work for Fox Rothschild, LLP in New Jersey. John Atkin was the only one of the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys handling all of the New Jersey Strike 3 Holdings filings, however, at the time in which he was with Fox Rothschild, LLP, I did not get the sense that he had authority to negotiate the cases himself. Rather, it appeared as if he was local counsel filing cases for Lincoln Bandlow.

          That changed in/around May, 2019. As you have read above, in my observation, John Atkin overthrew Lincoln Bandlow’s authority and carved out autonomy for himself among the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in the hierarchy. By May, 2019, he already left Fox Rothschild, LLP and started his own law firm. I learned about this when I started seeing “The Atkin Firm, LLC” on the cases in which I was representing clients rather than Fox Rothschild, LLP.

          I still think that Lincoln might still be the “boss” of the various Strike 3 Holdings attorneys across the US along with the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases, but it appears to me as if John Atkin is working on his own (maybe as a co-equal boss with Lincoln Bandlow and/or Jackie James), with sole authority and decision-making power over his cases.

          For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings New Jersey cases:

          NEW JERSEY STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

          Strike 3 Holdings New Jersey District Court

          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.109.249 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10179)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 71.245.115.134 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10177)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.15.186 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10180)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.228.165 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10185)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.126.57 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10184)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.114.252 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10183)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.24.202.59 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10173)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.127.245 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10174)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.157.64 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10181)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.82.226.89 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10178)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.71.239 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10175)

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.27.165 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10182)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.109.249 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10179)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 71.245.115.134 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10177)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.228.165 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10185)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.15.186 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10180)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.127.245 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10174)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.114.252 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10183)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.24.202.59 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10173)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.157.64 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10181)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.82.226.89 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10178)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.71.239 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10175)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.126.57 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10184)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.27.165 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10182)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 96.242.30.49 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10208)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 74.102.99.44 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10206)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 74.102.216.227 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10205)

          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 74.105.217.57 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10207)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.63.129.28 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10201)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.44.2 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10198)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.63.166.25 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10202)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.66.59 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10199)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.41.90 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10223)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.185.130 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10222)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.108.155 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10217)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.35.204.190 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10224)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 71.127.201.146 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10228)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.39.170 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10226)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.63.78.195 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10225)
          …v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.88.201.138 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10229)

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          *NOTES TO SELF: There are TWO IMPORTANT reasons why Strike 3 Holdings, LLC is putting so much money into filing lawsuits in New Jersey:

          1) Strike 3 Holdings, LLC almost lost New Jersey as a state in which they would be allowed by the federal court to sue defendants (for lawyers, it was bad case law). For a short while, judges stood up to Strike 3 Holdings, LLC and stopped them from being allowed to send subpoenas to ISPs to force the ISPs to hand over the subscriber information to them.

          Apparently Strike 3 won that battle, so now they are taking advantage of that “WIN” and suing many defendants in New Jersey.

          2) The plaintiff attorney for each of these New Jersey cases is John Atkin of the Atkin Firm, LLC. There is a history WHY John Atkin is important to New Jersey, and that history is uncovered by understanding WHAT HAPPENED with the shake-up of attorneys last year.

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          New York
          New York Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Jacqueline M. James (Jackie James) of The James Law Firm, PLLC.

          Just as I described in the “Connecticut” section, Jackie James used to represent Malibu Media, LLC, another prolific copyright troll. Jackie was in charge of all of the Malibu Media, LLC cases filed in the New York federal courts.

          I consider Jacqueline James to be a “boss” when categorizing her among the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in their hierarchy.

          Jackie James at one point was an important attorney filing many cases for Malibu Media, LLC. She even stayed with them after there was a shake-up of Malibu Media, LLC attorneys, but then one day she stopped filing for them.

          It is important to note that Jacqueline James stopped representing Malibu Media, LLC because she dropped them as a client. She did not “swing from one branch to the next” by dropping one client in favor of a more profitable one. When she dropped Malibu Media, LLC as a client, she did not have another client.

          It was only later that [I presume] Strike 3 Holdings contacted her and asked her to file copyright infringement lawsuits on their behalf. Today, she appears to have independent authority and control of her cases, and she is in charge of the Strike 3 Holdings federal court lawsuits filed in New York and more recently, in Connecticut.

          When negotiating cases, Jacqueline James is known to be a difficult negotiator, but she is also fair. Be prepared to support everything you say with facts and if needed, documentation. Jackie James is the kind of attorney who does not simply take statements at face value, but she asks questions and follow-up questions… often which lead to uncomfortable conversations. Again, however, she is not known to gouge on settlement prices, but she is a tough in her approach.

          For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings New York cases:

          NEW YORK STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

          New York Eastern District Court

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 2:20-cv-03660, 2:20-cv-03654, 2:20-cv-03657, 2:20-cv-03653, 2:20-cv-03646, 2:20-cv-03659, 2:20-cv-03655, 2:20-cv-03648, 2:20-cv-03649, 2:20-cv-03658, 2:20-cv-03647, 2:20-cv-03651, 2:20-cv-03650, 2:20-cv-03656, and 2:20-cv-03399.)

          New York Southern District Court

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:20-cv-06030, and 1:20-cv-05425.)

          New York Western District Court

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:20-cv-01081, 1:20-cv-01079, 1:20-cv-01084, 1:20-cv-01083, 1:20-cv-01082, 1:20-cv-01085, 1:20-cv-01080, and 6:20-cv-06505.)

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          UPDATE: I am happy to share that while searching for Dawn Sciarrino (when writing up the Virginia cases), I could not understand why she would take Strike 3 Holdings, LLC as a client. However, searching for her, I found that Jackie James actually listed her as an attorney under her law firm. While I will post Dawn’s page under her state, because her we are discussing Jackie, you can find Jacqueline James’ profile and website here.

          Maryland
          Maryland Strike 3 Holdings cases used to be run by Jessica Haire of Fox Rothschild, LLP, but more recently, they are run by Elsy Marleni Ramos Velasquez of Clark Hill PLC.

          Let’s cover Jessica Haire first.

          Pre-May, 2019.

          The first time I spoke to Jessica Haire was in March, 2018. She and Lincoln Bandlow were colleagues at Fox Rothschild, LLP and were working together on managing the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys and the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases. At the time, whenever I would message Lincoln Bandlow, Jessica Haire would often respond back to me on his behalf.

          It is interesting to note, however, that when Lincoln Bandlow left Fox Rothschild, LLP, Jessica Haire continued to work for them. I believe she is still working for them today.

          Post-May, 2019:

          Elsy Marleni Ramos Velasquez of Clark Hill PLC (“Elsy Velasquez”) is the name of the Strike 3 Holdings attorney who is showing up for the current slew of Strike 3 filings in Maryland District Court. She showed up as a new attorney filing lawsuits for Strike 3 Holdings, LLC [if I recall correctly] shortly after Lincoln Bandlow left Fox Rothschild, LLP and started his new law firm.

          She works out of Clark Hill PLC, and she works out of their Washington, DC office.

          The first time I contacted Elsy Velasquez was in May, 2019 because she was the attorney that was taking over the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC Maryland cases after the shake-up of their attorneys.

          It is important to note that after a hiatus of filings (probably due to the pandemic), Strike 3 Holdings, LLC has put a lot of faith in Elsy Velasquez by allowing her to file many cases on their behalf.

          For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings Maryland cases:

          MARYLAND STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

          Strike 3 Holdings Maryland District Court

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe* (Case Nos. 8:20-cv-02298, 8:20-cv-02299, 8:20-cv-02300, 1:20-cv-02276, 1:20-cv-02271, 1:20-cv-02278, 1:20-cv-02277, 1:20-cv-02279, 1:20-cv-02285, 1:20-cv-02286, 1:20-cv-02284, 1:20-cv-02283, 1:20-cv-02280, 8:20-cv-02287, 8:20-cv-02289, 8:20-cv-02290, 8:20-cv-02291, 8:20-cv-02288, 8:20-cv-02293, 8:20-cv-02292, 8:20-cv-02295, 8:20-cv-02294, 8:20-cv-02296, 8:20-cv-02297, 8:20-cv-02298, 8:20-cv-02299, and 8:20-cv-02300)

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          *NOTES TO SELF: It is important to note that Strike 3 Holdings appears to be putting A LOT of money and resources into filing lawsuits in Maryland.

          …The logic is that each of these defendants has money to pay a large settlement to them, or else they wouldn’t file the lawsuit against them.

          Also interesting is that EVERY ONE of these Maryland cases were filed on ONE DAY — AUGUST 6TH, 2020.

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          Pennsylvania
          Pennsylvania Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Jason M. Saruya of Clark Hill PLC.

          Jason Saruya of Clark Hill PLC is the name of the attorney who is showing up for the Strike 3 filings in Pennsylvania District Court.

          He works for Clark Hill PLC, and he works out of the Philadephia, PA office.

          There is not much information about Jason Saruya, but from what I understand, he is a younger attorney, and he is probably working with Elsy Velasquez as his superior, as Elsy Velasquez was the attorney from Clark Hill PLC that took over the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC Maryland cases after the shake-up of their attorneys.

          For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings Pennsylvania cases:

          PENNSYLVANIA STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

          Pennsylvania Middle District Court*

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.55.82.15 (Case No. 1:20-cv-01322)
          …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.130.61.38 (Case No. 1:20-cv-01324)
          …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.58.204.183 (Case No. 1:20-cv-01323)

          [*NOTE TO SELF: It is interesting that they are filing against defendants in the Pennsylvania MIDDLE District Court, and *NOT* in the Pennsylvania EASTERN District Court (where 99% of copyright troll litigation over the years happens there). I do not have a reason why this is the case.]

          Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

          Virginia
          Virginia Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Dawn Marie Sciarrino of Sciarrino & Shubert, PLLC (more recently, I have found that she is working for Jacqueline James, the Strike 3 Holdings attorney for the NY/CT region).

          Dawn Marie Sciarrino is the name of the attorney who is showing up for the Strike 3 filings in the Virginia federal court filings.

          MY ORIGINAL WRITE-UP ON DAWN:
          Dawn Marie appears to be a partner in her law firm, and she works out of Centreville, VA.

          There is not much information about Dawn Marie Sciarrino (even their https://www.sciarrino.com website was down when I tried to reach it).

          From what I understand, she has been practicing as an attorney for many years. Her first bar was in New York in 1991, and she has represented clients before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and for the District of Columbia Circut.

          What I do not understand is… [with her background, both educational and vocational] why in the world would she take Strike 3 Holdings, LLC as a client? This makes no sense to me.

          UPDATED INFORMATION:
          Doing further research, I was very surprised to see that Dawn Sciarrino was listed as an attorney in Jackie James’ website.

          Understanding Jackie James’ background and her experience, the connection between Jackie and Dawn became clear. They know each other. It was likely Jackie who suggested that Dawn take the Virginia cases because Strike 3 Holdings, LLC needed an attorney to file lawsuits in the Virginia federal courts against those Miami-Dade Strike 3 Holdings defendants who did not settle the claims against them.

          For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings Virginia cases:

          VIRGINIA STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

          Virginia Eastern District Court

          Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:20-cv-00825, 1:20-cv-00823, and 1:20-cv-00824.)

          It is now 8/21/2020, 8:30am CDT, and I have written up what I could find on the current list of Strike 3 Holdings attorneys and their Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases filed both in Miami-Dade, and in the federal courts. Obviously more cases are filed each day, so I will do what I can to keep it current. Also in this article, I am using a new coding feature (new for me, at least) called Shortcodes. If you notice that something isn’t working on the page, or that I broke the code, please e-mail me at [email protected].


          [CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about the varioius Strike 3 Holdings attorneys and my experiences with them, you can e-mail us at info[at]cashmanlawfirm.com, you can set up a free and confidential phone consultation to speak to us about your Strike 3 Holdings, LLC case, or you can send a SMS / WhatsApp message to us at 713-364-3476 (this is our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC’s number].

          CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

            NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

            Skip to content