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.

        The Truth about Kerry Culpepper IP movie lawsuits.

        hb-productions-fallen-productions-settlements Multiple Settlements from One Lawsuit

        Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP in Hawaii is a complicated attorney. I have demonstrated in previous articles that Kerry Culpepper thinks “at levels higher than the average person,” and that he can usually run circles around judges do not have the caffeine to oppose him. Here, Kerry Culpepper brazenly exposes what I call a COMMON COPYRIGHT TROLL entity by representing ALL of the movie copyright trolls together in one lawsuit. [Click to Tweet!]

        [SEPTEMBER 2020 UPDATE: SETTLEMENT DEMAND E-MAILS.]

        CULPEPPER IP has figured out a way to enforce his movie clients’ copyrights out-of-court. He has done this by sending settlement demand e-mails to internet users accused of VISITING, REGISTERING (with their real e-mail address), and DOWNLOADING copyrighted movies from the YTS website.

        These settlement demand letters have been sent *via e-mail* by Attorney Joshua Lee (who now appears to be working for Kerry Culpepper at Culpepper IP). Joshua Lee is also the name which is appearing on many of the Culpepper IP settlement demand letters sent directly to internet users… without an ISP subpoena, without a Hawaii Rule 512(h) subpoena, without asking Cloudfront or Google Analytics to hand over the IP address information, and without a copyright infringement lawsuit in the Hawaii District Court.

        The reason I am mentioning the Culpepper IP settlement demand e-mails here [in this article] is because with Kerry Culpepper, YOU MUST BE PREPARED that there is SOMETHING ELSE going on behind the scenes.

        While in the settlement demand email” article I conclude that Culpepper’s end goal is to engage in “lawfare” against the piracy websites in order to protect his movie clients’ interests, you must be prepared that he is simply doing this for ONLY PROFIT, in which the topics I wrote about in this article REMAIN VERY RELEVANT TO YOUR SETTLEMENT DEMAND E-MAIL.

        Here is that article for your reference: The truth about why Culpepper IP is sending settlement demand letters VIA E-MAIL to YTS users.

        Now back to the movie lawsuits…

        Expect to be asked to pay multiple settlements for multiple movies downloaded.

        Be warned that settling the Fallen Productions Inc. (or HB Productions Inc.) ISP subpoena-based lawsuits might result in Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP asking you to pay for additional settlements for other movies your accused IP address downloaded on other dates using bittorrent.

        [Also be warned that if you hire a “settlement factory” defense attorney, chances are high that in their attempt to streamline the settlement process, you will not only pay a settlement for the “Angel Has Fallen” movie (or the “Hellboy” movie, or whatever movie is behind that particular copyright infringement lawsuit), but you may also end up having to pay for EACH AND EVERY OTHER MOVIE you may have downloaded over the past few years (assuming “tongue-in-cheek” for a moment that this same plaintiff attorney is representing the other movie companies as well).]

        How is it that Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP is the same attorney representing ALL the movie lawsuits?

        Now obviously Kerry Culpepper is only one attorney in Hawaii. There have been *MANY* attorneys over the past ten years which I consider to be copyright troll attorneys who represent the same set of clients. However, in the past few days / weeks, Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP started a storm of activity on the web by going after YTS / 1337x.to — the bittorrent trackers and the piracy websites themselves.

        Then, he followed this up be asking the court for a subpoena to disclose the identity of accused downloaders who used those website to download his client’s movies.

        …Then, Kerry Culpepper sent DMCA settlement demand letters to these accused downloaders asking them to settle the claims against them for $1,000 per movie download or face a copyright infringement lawsuit in the federal courts. Thus, I am using Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP as the example in this article about his client — a COMMON MOVIE TROLL entity.

        Have you heard? There is STILL a COMMON COPYRIGHT TROLL entity behind all of the movie lawsuits in the US.

        I am about to claim (again, 3 years later) that the same set of attorneys (here, Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP) are behind ALL of the movie lawsuits filed in the US (and that each of these attorneys are working for the same common copyright troll entity), and I have proof.

        [Click to Tweet!]

        In 2017, I spent a lot of time making known that the movie-based bittorrent cases were all being run by the same people behind the scenes. It was too coincidental that the same “copyright troll” attorneys were attracting every single movie company to be “their” client. 

        For years, I had only anecdotal evidence that the same attorneys were representing the same set of movie companies. It was only here in this lawsuit [All the movie companies together (represented by Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP) v. Harry Beasor and DOE (Case No. 1:20-cv-00004) in the Hawaii District Court] that I had demonstrable proof that one attorney was representing EACH AND EVERY ONE of the movie copyright trolls.

        [Initially, I could explain this theory away by thinking that it is more plausible that there is a large entity who moves within the circles of the large movie producers and has the ear of the production companies.  Thus, when there is (yet) a(nother) movie that flops, they suggest that this movie production company use their services and sue downloaders of the film to re-coup losses from their failed movie.  At one point, I thought it was the MPAA itself which was the entity behind the scenes.  Within the context of this “bigger” entity, the plaintiff attorneys filing the lawsuits in each state are merely “cogs” in the wheel of this larger entity.]

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

        One Explanation: ONE attorney in each state works for the same COMMON COPYRIGHT TROLL entity.

        Let’s elaborate using logic.  If ONE plaintiff attorney in one particular state has become the ONLY ATTORNEY who files ALL of the movie lawsuits, then this plaintiff attorney must either be a MARKETING GENIUS by achieving this monopoly (meaning, the plaintiff attorney is 100% successful in attracting every one of the new movie lawsuits AND has been 100% successful in excluding EVERY OTHER ATTORNEY from filing movie lawsuits in that particular state)…

        …Or (more likely,) there are a group of insiders or [there is] a single entity behind the scenes [with a reputation among the movie production companies] which actively sells their services to each of the movie companies — [offering to sue every downloader for copyright infringement].

        Each attorney filing in each state’s federal court is working for this same “common copyright troll” entity which provides them with the instructions to sue defendants accused of downloading their client’s copyrighted movie titles. 

        My observation: The same movie companies are always represented by the SAME copyright troll attorneys in each state.

        Based on my observations over the years, the SAME plaintiff attorneys represent the SAME movie companies in EVERY STATE.

        With this case (pictured above), I can demonstrate that in the Hawaii District Court, Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP is the attorney that is representing each and every one of the movie lawsuits.

        In other words, just as Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP is the “copyright troll movie attorney” in Hawaii, there are other plaintiff attorneys in other states who are working for a common copyright troll entity working behind the scenes. 

        Who is this COMMON COPYRIGHT TROLL entity?

        But who is this common copyright troll entity?  Thinking logically that the MPAA is too-big-of-an-entity to cause such mischief, after some searching, in 2017, I found a company named “Rights Enforcement” (found at RightsEnforcement.com) being run by “Carl Crowell, a one-man police force for Hollywood studios.

        RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT (Now Defunct)

        [As of writing this article, Rights Enforcement has since taken down their website and changed their name. I currently do not know under what name they are operating].

        An Example of Copyright Trolls Hiding Their Activities: Carl Crowell and RightsEnforcement.com

        It was further proof at the time that there was a copyright troll [at the time, Carl Crowell, owner of RightsEnforcement.com (RightsEnforcement website *now taken down or changed to some other name I am not yet aware of*)] who was [at the time] posting each of the movies on their websites only to have those exact movies be the movies that were used to sue accused downloaders across the US.Below is an image taken from the now defunct RightsEnforcement.com website:

        kerry-culpepper-ip-dmca-settlement-letters-hb-productions-fallen-angel-productions-carl-crowell-guardaley-connection

        NOTE: It appears to me that Rights Enforcement (purposefully named to be an impossible name to find on a Google Search) was the website that was used to sell Carl Crowell’s “Hire us and we’ll sue [for you] internet users who have downloaded your copyrighted films.” The RightsEnforcement.com website’s last update was in July, 2017 when they updated the list of movies.

        RightsEnforcement.com has since been removed and their domain abandoned.

        You might think this means that they went out of business, but really, based on my own research, it appears as if they did not want people to be aware of their activities. In other words, the RightsEnforcement.com website was meant to be hidden from people like you and me, and our articles brought too much exposure to what they were doing.

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

        As you can see below, Carl Crowell and RightsEnforcement.com even took steps to hide their footsteps by excluding their website history from archive.org’s “Way Back Machine.”

        settlements-hb-productions-fallen-productions Wayback Machine RightsEnforcement

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

        Why I think that HB Productions & Fallen Productions, Inc. are part of this “common copyright troll” conglomerate entity.

        Returning to the HB Productions, Inc. (“Hellboy”) and Fallen Productions, Inc. (“Angel Has Fallen”) lawsuits, I have reason to believe that these two “shell” production companies are yet TWO MORE companies affiliated with Carl Crowell, Rights Enforcement (whatever name they go by now), and Guardaley (the German entity probably behind even Carl Crowell).

        As you can see, these two copyright trolls are represented in this lawsuit image above by Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP.

        When I first saw this, I was surprised to see that so many of the “common copyright troll” entity’s clients showed up as co-plaintiffs… suing TOGETHER in ONE copyright infringement lawsuit…

        But then when I immediately saw that this was filed in the US DISTRICT COURT… FOR THE DISTRICT OF *HAWAII*, my immediate thought was that “Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP must have been the one who filed this.” Only he would have the strategic calculations that would inspire him to bunch these lawsuits plaintiffs together.

        “Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP” in Hawaii must have been the one who sued these defendants for all of his client’s movies (including HB Productions Inc. & Fallen Productions Inc.).

        In sum, call this all a conspiracy theory, but then notice which copyright holders have just sued defendants TOGETHER IN ONE LAWSUIT filed by Kerry Culpepper in the Hawaii District Court:

        kerry-culpepper-of-culpepper-ip-filed-fallen-productions-angel-has-fallen-hb-productions-hellboy-isp-subpoena-movie-lawsuit-common-troll

        So to date, which “copyright troll” movie companies are represented by this “COMMON COPYRIGHT TROLL” MOVIE CONGLOMERATE”? Let’s look:

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

        Coincidence that kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP is representing each of the movie companies together?

        Is it ANY COINCIDENCE that Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP (the plaintiff attorney for the Fallen Productions Inc. and the HB Productions Inc. ISP subpoena based lawsuits) is also suing defendants for the bittorrent download of these other movies as well? …in the SAME LAWSUIT?

        kerry-culpepper-ip-dmca-settlement-letters-hb-productions-fallen-productions Common Troll HB Productions & Fallen Productions

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

        Do you think if you were sued for just one title… and Kerry Culpepper has reason to know that the IP address [that you were assigned from your ISP] was also seen downloading these other movies, do you think that you will also be asked to settle the claims against you for these other movies too?

        kerry-culpepper-ip-dmca-settlement-letters-hb-productions-fallen-productions Common Troll HB Productions & Fallen Productions

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

        Have Movie Companies Taken a Lesson [to ask for multiple settlements] from the Porn Industry Strike 3 Holdings LLC & Malibu Media LLC Lawsuits?

        Strike 3 Holdings LLC and Malibu Media LLC (both pornography-based lawsuits) found a way to force accused adult film downloaders to not only settle the claims against them for one copyrighted movie downloaded, but in every lawsuit, they now ask for settlements for each and every copyrighted title ever downloaded by that internet user.

        Do you think that the plaintiff attorneys behind the Fallen Productions Inc. “Angel Has Fallen” movie John Doe lawsuits (or the HB Productions inc. “Hellboy” movie John Doe lawsuits) won’t also ask for settlements from other movies they also believe that you downloaded in the past?

        kerry-culpepper-ip-dmca-settlement-letters-hb-productions-fallen-productions Common Troll HB Productions & Fallen Productions

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

        [Remember, copyright infringement gives the copyright holder *THREE YEARS* from the alleged date of infringement to file a copyright infringement John Doe lawsuit against you for the bittorrent-based download of that copyrighted movie.]

        How many times are YOU willing to settle the claims against you?

        In sum, unlike Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP, most plaintiff attorneys have been trying to hide on the court’s dockets that they are suing for one video, but asking for settlements for other titles allegedly downloaded by that same downloader. Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP in Hawaii has demonstrated that there is an explicit link between these copyright holders by suing defendants for the download of each of these copyright holders’ copyrighted movie titles. [Click to Tweet!]

        Why using a settlement factory attorney to settle claims in lawsuits like these could be problematic.

        I don’t even need to breach this topic, but settlement factory attorneys will try to settle the claims made against their client in the most “economical” method possible.

        DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT HIRING A SETTLEMENT FACTORY ATTORNEY TO SETTLE ONE TITLE CLAIMED AGAINST YOU WILL KEEP YOU OUT OF TROUBLE WHEN THAT SAME COPYRIGHT ATTORNEY TAKES YOUR SETTLEMENT MONEY AND LATER ASKS FOR MORE SETTLEMENTS FOR “OTHER TITLES DOWNLOADED?”

        …How many times can you afford to settle a copyright claim against you? How many titles can you afford to pay to settle?

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

        Misleading HB Productions Inc. & Fallen Productions Inc. Filings?

        Thus far, these are the HB Productions Inc. and Fallen Productions Inc. that have been filed… each alleging ONLY the download of ONE title. Deceptive? Have the plaintiff attorneys in these cases disclosed the REAL INTERESTED PARTY or is the common-troll hoax still trying to be hidden?

        HB Productions ISP subpoenas ordered in the Illinois Northern District Court:

        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-20 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07511)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-26 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07159)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-20 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07512)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-21 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07161)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-25 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07508)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-25 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07002)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-19 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07005)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-23 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07513)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-24 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07157)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-23 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07163)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-26 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07003)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-23 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07514)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-21 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07160)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-21 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07004)
        HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-22 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07006)

        HB Productions ISP subpoenas ordered in the Nevada District Court:

        HB Productions, Inc. v. Doe Defendants 1-5 (Case No. 2:19-cv-01849)

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

        Fallen Productions ISP subpoenas ordered in the Illinois Northern District Court:

        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-27 (Case No. 1:19-cv-08339)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-29 (Case No. 1:19-cv-08343)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-28 (Case No. 1:19-cv-08340)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-29 (Case No. 1:19-cv-08341)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-31 (Case No. 1:19-cv-08342)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-24 (Case No. 1:20-cv-00367)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-24 (Case No. 1:20-cv-00369)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-23 (Case No. 1:20-cv-00374)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-24 (Case No. 1:20-cv-00371)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-24 (Case No. 1:20-cv-00368)

        Fallen Productions ISP subpoenas ordered in the Hawaii District Court:

        Fallen Productions, Inc. et al v. Beasor et al (Case No. 1:20-cv-00004)
        Fallen Productions, Inc. et al v. DOE (Case No. 1:20-cv-00033)

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

        In sum, understand from this article the dynamics of who is really suing you.

        In sum, just be careful when dealing with any of these movie company lawsuits.  I have written about Kerry Culpepper of Culpepper IP many times, and I have even called him an “evil genius” at times because he thinks out of the box.

        Chances are that each movie lawsuit is filed by the same attorney who is filing other movie lawsuits, and because there is a “common copyright troll” between the various lawsuits, there is a mechanism for them to look up your accused IP address and check to see whether you have downloaded any of their “other clients’ copyrighted titles.”

        If you as a defendant are unaware of this fact, or if you are an attorney who is purposefully blind to this fact (this is one of my big problems with “settlement factory” defense attorneys), then you expose yourself (or you expose your client) to additional claims of copyright infringement while that plaintiff attorney seeks to solicit additional money for additional titles allegedly downloaded… just after you (or your client) paid them thousands of dollars to settle the claims asserted in the lawsuit.

        Obviously I am simplifying here greatly (and not all attorneys ask for additional settlements), but for what it is worth, understanding the dynamics of who is suing you and where they received your information is very important when deciding how to approach the defense of your case… especially when you seek to settle one claim of copyright infringement and that plaintiff attorney claims that you downloaded four other titles belonging to “his” clients.

        [Please Click to Tweet!]


        [CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about the Fallen Productions, Inc. cases and options on how to proceed (even specifically for your case), 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 Fallen Productions, Inc. case, 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.

          Hawaii’s 512(h) subpoenas unmask identities in a sneaky way.

          Kerry-Culpepper-IP 512(h) subpoenas Hunter Killer Productions Inc.

          Kerry Culpepper of Hawaii-based Culpepper IP LLLC has taken a roundabout way of uncovering the identities of Verizon Wireless subscribers who downloaded the Hunter Killer movie using their cell phones. I wanted to spend a moment on how Culpepper did this, because it provides a good follow-up on my 5/3 article about the Hunter Killer Productions Inc. lawsuits.

          Culpepper IP is the Hawaii-based law firm which Kerry Culpepper has since used to send 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 appears to be a first year associate who is working for Kerry Culpepper. Joshua Lee is also the name which is appearing on many of the Culpepper IP settlement demand letters, which is why I am mentioning it here.

          Hunter Killer Inc v. John Does as a Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

          Ordinarily the case would show up on my radar because the plaintiff attorney would file a Hunter Killer Productions Inc. v. John Does copyright infringement lawsuit in a particular federal court (here, the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii).

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

          Kerry Culpepper would then ask the court for what is referred to as “expedited discovery,” meaning, he would ask the court to authorize Culpepper to send a subpoena to the ISP. I described this process in detail just days ago in the “How Paul Beik Has Malibu Media LLC Defendants Served” section of the linked article.

          This ISP subpoena would ordinarily then force the Hawaii-based ISP to hand over the name of the John Doe defendant(s) accused of infringing the Hunter Killer Productions Inc. copyright holder’s “Hunter Killer” movie.

          Judges are aware of the “copyright troll” problem.

          I had to ask myself, “why would Kerry Culpepper go through such loops to disclose the identity of the alleged downloaders? Couldn’t he have just filed a Hunter Killer Productions Inc. v. Does 1-20 copyright infringement lawsuit against 20 downloaders like any other plaintiff attorney / copyright holder?

          Then it occurred to me: In the list of Hunter Killer Productions Inc. lawsuits filed against defendants, I did not see *any* cases filed in the Hawaii District Court. (Rather, I only saw a few Hunter Killer Productions Inc. cases filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois).

          Could it be that the Hawaii District Court has outlawed Rule 26 “expedited discovery” bittorrent-based copyright infringement cases in their case holdings? If Kerry Culpepper cannot get a federal judge to grant an “expedited discovery” to allow him to send a subpoena to the ISPs [to discover the identity of the would-be John Doe defendants], then the plaintiff attorney has a copyright infringement lawsuit without any known defendants.

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

          Judges across the US have become aware of the problem we refer to as “copyright trolling,” where a copyright holder uses the federal courts to file a copyright infringement lawsuit against a set of unknown defendants. They use the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule 26) “expedited discovery” tool to unmask the identities of the defendants sued in the lawsuits.

          As a result of much abuse and harassment by a number of plaintiff attorneys, some judges have taken proactive steps to DENY the plaintiff attorney’s FRCP Rule 26 “expedited discovery” requests. If this is what is happening in Hawaii, this would in theory prevent Kerry Culpepper from forcing the ISP to hand over the names of the account subscribers (hence, no known defendants to sue).

          What is a “MISCELLANEOUS CASE”?

          What a BORING name for such an abused type of lawsuit!!!

          I have seen lawsuits that look something like “Case No. 1:19-mc-00123” which differ from the civil cases [which look like “Case No. 1:19-cv-00123”]. These “miscellaneous” cases do not formally accuse the defendant of copyright infringement in the form of a complaint, but rather, they function more as a “motion to compel” [to force] a third party (here, Verizon Wireless) to disclose the identity of a would-be defendant.

          From a non-lawyer’s eye, who cares whether the plaintiff attorney used a “1:19-cv-12345″ (a “civil” case) to file their lawsuit, or a “1:19-mc-12345″ (“miscellaneous” case) to discover the identity of the alleged infringer. It is the same result — the plaintiff attorney (here, Kerry Culpepper of Hawaii-based Culpepper IP LLLC) acquires the name of the alleged infringer and contacts him or her with the intention of accusing them of copyright infringement.

          However it is the BACKHANDED WAY the plaintiff attorney gets his defendants that simply irks me.

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

          I saw these same “miscellaneous case” filings in Florida state courts in 2010-2012.

          This is not the first time I have seen “miscellaneous cases (mc)” rather than the typical “civil cases (cv)”.

          Keith Lipscomb, the attorney [at the time] behind all of the Malibu Media LLC cases (and formerly, the Patrick Collins Inc. cases from 2010-2012) used to use a similar mechanism in the Florida state courts to achieve these same ends. As an attorney myself who operates in the FEDERAL COURTS, a “mc” case filed in a state court would not show up on my radar.

          What Kerry Culpepper did in Hawaii to force the clerk to issue 512(h) subpoenas to Verizon Wireless

          Kerry Culpepper in my opinion is one of the smarter plaintiff attorneys. I have always known this, as his copyright infringement lawsuits were always out-of-the-box.

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

          When dealing with him, Culpepper rarely asked for a settlement outright — rather, he had a roundabout way of explaining that, “…since my client accessed the bittorrent file 530 times over a two-day (26 hour) period to download a full copy of the movie, and that bittorrent swarm shared the movie with 2,930 other bittorrent users over those same 26 hours, judging the discounted cost of a movie at Wal*Mart is $2.99 (in a clearance bin, not $19.99 retail on the shelf), multiply the $2.99 x 2,930 to arrive at a settlement price of $8,760.70.”

          His thinking style was also visible when he decided to sue a group of individuals who I presume were profiting off of the ad sales of a movie app which shares pirated movies. Rather than “shake down” the end user (the downloader), he went after the “big bucks,” here I assume the ad revenue, as the Showbox app was actively being used [and ads shown] by literally millions of users.

          In sum, Kerry Culpepper a good mind which he uses to discover methods of suing defendants for profit.

          Kerry Culpepper-512(h)-subpoenas-hawaii-hunter-killer-productions

          Hunter Killer Productions Inc. and their new defendants.

          This brings us to Kerry Culpepper’s latest feat — getting the Hawaii Federal Court to force Verizon Wireless to hand over the names of several defendants WITHOUT EVER FILING A COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT LAWSUIT.

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

          In his application to the US District Court for the District of Hawaii entitled “In re Subpoena to Verizon Wireless” (Case No. 1:19-mc-00125), he invokes 17 USC 512(h) to ask the *CLERK* (not a judge, and WITHOUT a lawsuit filed) to issue a subpoena to disclose the identity of an alleged copyright infringer.

          Let me say that again. Kerry Culpepper just succeeded in getting the CLERK to issue a subpoena WITHOUT ANY JUDGE ruling on the motion, and WITHOUT NEEDING TO FILE ANY COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT LAWSUIT.

          Literally, the entire “miscellaneous” lawsuit was:

          • Doc 1) Application for a 512(h) subpoena,
          • Doc 2) Judge assigns the case to a magistrate judge (in my opinion, in an “I’m not touching this one,” way),
          • Doc 3) Clerk issues subpoena.
            [CASE CLOSED]

          KERRY CULPEPPER’S ARGUMENT TO THE HAWAII DISTRICT COURT

          Kerry Culpepper’s argument was simple. I am laying it out in points below:

          1) DC Circuit said that a 512(h) subpoena can only be issued to an ISP engaged in storing infringing copyrighted materials on their servers. (351 F.3d 1229, 1233 (D.C. Cir. 2003)).

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

          2) Eighth circuit said that a 512(h) subpoena only applies to an ISP that directly stores, caches, or provides links to infringing materials. (393 F.3d 771, 776-77 (8th Cir. 2005)).

          Kerry Culpepper noted that neither court mentioned anything about whether a subpoena can be issued to an ISP that acts as a CONDUIT [to allow their subscribers to pass copyrighted content through their servers].

          Here is where Kerry Culpepper shows his talents:

          Culpepper then commented that the 9th Circuit (which is a higher court which includes and is binding upon the Hawaii District) has not ruled on whether a copyright holder can use a 512(h) subpoena to an ISP that acts as a CONDUIT [to allow their subscribers to infringe copyrighted materials].

          He then invoked the recent BMG Rights Management (US) LLC v. Cox Communications Inc., 881 F.3d 293, 300 (4th Cir. 2018) case to conclude that the 9th Circuit (including the Hawaii District Court) would allow such a 512(h) subpoena.

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

          PERSONAL NOTE:

          There are some people who operate at such a high level that I get a headache when listening to them. I could strain to understand them, but I wonder whether I would understand them better if I too were a few magnitudes smarter.

          I read the arguments and looked up the references, but I don’t get the jump in logic.

          Personally, I think Culpepper confused the court with a logic-based argument, but I believe he jumped to a conclusion that his facts did not support.

          However, I’ve heard Culpepper speak — he is a smart dude and he thinks very quickly. Sometimes it is difficult to understand him because he is thinking at levels higher than the average person (here, the average judge) can comprehend.

          However, I still think that the judge dropped the ball and did not have the caffeine to oppose Culpepper (NOTE: there was no “defense” counsel to oppose him), and the Hawaii court capitulated.

          This is how I see it after reading what happened.

          [UPDATE: After writing this e-mail, Kerry Culpepper explained his reasoning why 512(h) subpoenas are a legitimate way to uncover the identities of his client’s movies.]

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

          THE END RESULT: CULPEPPER KNOWS WHO YOU ARE.

          The end result is that now Verizon Wireless will be complying with the subpoena and providing Culpepper here, a list of 20 defendants who allegedly used their cell phones to view, stream, or download copies of his client’s Hunter Killer movie, and the settlement demands will likely ensue.

          If you are an attorney and have the desire to see exactly what Kerry Culpepper did, here is the link to his application to the court.

          If you are a defendant (or you received a letter from Kerry Culpepper asking for settlement money for the download of the Hunter Killer movie using your cell phone), at least now you will understand how he got your name.

          hawaii-512h-subpoenas-kerry-culpepper-ip-hunter-killer-settlement-hawaii-hi
          Perlinator / Pixabay

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


          [CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about the Hunter Killer Productions Inc. cases and options on how to proceed (even specifically for your case), 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 Hunter Killer Productions Inc. case, 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.

            Skip to content