The MPAA hired a hacker to steal data from a firm it had accused of aiding copyright violators, according to a suit filed Wed. Valence Media, parent of Torrentspy.com, said in its suit that the company was approached by a man claiming an MPAA executive paid him to retrieve private data on the firm. The suit, filed in U.S. Dist. Court, Central District of Cal., doesn’t name the executive, but said the man was asked to find private information on Torrentspy.com, a Bit Torrent indexing site. “We find it very ironic that the MPAA, an organization that is supposed to fight piracy, is involved in piracy in trying to contain alleged unauthorized users,” said Ira Rothken, Torrentspy’s attorney. The MPAA allegedly paid the man $15,000 to steal e-mails and trade secrets, Torrentspy’s complaint said. The man admitted his role and is cooperating with Torrentspy, it said. The suit said the man stole data on Torrentspy income and expenses, Torrentspy employees’ private e-mails, information on its servers and billing information. “[Torrentspy] facilitates piracy,” a spokeswoman for the MPAA said: “They know the law is not on their side and they are responding with a baseless claim.” In February, MPAA sued Torrentspy and other search engines, alleging they aid in the flow of unauthorized content over the Internet. The movie industry claims Torrentspy’s main function was to facilitate copyright infringement (WID March 29 p10). Torrentspy has said the 2 cases are unrelated. “It will be interesting to see if the MPAA wants to hide behind general denial or wants to admit they paid someone,” Rothken said: “If they are not going to answer that question it would be quite telling.” Torrentspy has asked for unspecified damages and a jury title.
Defendants in a major govt. e-surveillance case this week filed a series of responses to a Mon. Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) brief in U.S. Dist. Court, San Francisco. AT&T and the govt. both argued that material EFF seeks in discovery threatens to trade and security-related secrets. The govt.’s brief argued “the United States has not lightly invoked the state secrets privilege, and the weighty reasons for asserting the privilege are apparent from the classified material submitted in support of its assertion.” EFF staff attorney Kevin Bankston, whose brief earlier in the week argued for more specificity in the govt.’s state secrets claim, said several of the arguments on all sides are likely to expand. “The government is arguing that even if our allegations are true… regardless of Congress’ laws they can do that and no court can ever examine the legality of it,” he said.
Defendants in a major govt. wiretap case this week filed a series of responses to a Mon. Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) brief in U.S. Dist. Court, Northern Cal. AT&T and the govt. both argued that material EFF seeks in discovery threatens trade and security-related secrets. The govt.’s brief argued “the United States has not lightly invoked the state secrets privilege, and the weighty reasons for asserting the privilege are apparent from the classified material submitted in support of its assertion.” EFF staff attorney Kevin Bankston, whose brief earlier in the week argued for more specificity in the govt.’s state secrets claim, said several of the arguments on all sides are likely to expand. “The government is arguing that even if our allegations are true… regardless of Congress’ laws they can do that and no court can ever examine the legality of it,” he said.
Beset by mounting losses, Infinium Labs needs “immediate additional capital to continue development” of its Phantom Lapboard wireless keyboard/mouse PC gaming device and for its general operations, the firm said in a 10-QSB filing at the SEC.
The judge in the electronic eavesdropping class action case against AT&T denied the company’s request to close the courtroom for Wed.’s hearing. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed the class action against AT&T for allegedly turning over customer telephone and Internet information to NSA. Wed.’s discussions featured evidence from a retired AT&T telecom technician and several internal documents that purportedly support EFF’s position.
DoJ entered another file-sharing suit to restate its view that the Copyright Act’s distribution right covers Internet transmission, leading a prominent file-sharing defense lawyer to accuse the agency of “working together” with RIAA -- a charge denied by the industry group. DoJ also asked the U.S. Dist. Court, Abilene, Tex., if it could weigh in on the “making available” issue in file-sharing, if the court addresses the subject in Fonovisa v. Alvarez. DoJ made the same points in a recent file-sharing case, Elektra v. Barker in U.S. Dist. Court, N.Y., in that case filing only after an amicus brief contested the validity of applying the distribution right to digital files as opposed to physical media. The provision is crucial to DoJ criminal cases (WID April 25 p3). DoJ said the Act’s “material object” language meant to set the “intangible legal right in the copyright itself” apart from the “physical embodiment of that work” in various media; common law links the concepts, DoJ said. The “making available” argument -- which says copyrighted files’ presence in a shared folder is infringement -- implicates World Intellectual Property Organization treaties and a free trade agreement, DoJ said. Ray Beckerman of blog Recording Industry vs. the People said it seems in Fonovisa that “RIAA and the DoJ are working together.” Elektra, in which the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed the precipitating amicus brief, had a far higher profile than Fonovisa, Beckerman said. “How would the DoJ have even known of the existence of the [Fonovisa] case” without an RIAA tip? he said in an interview. DoJ usually files statements of interest when a court tells it a party has challenged a law’s constitutionality, and DoJ has a “strong opinion” that the law is constitutional, Beckerman said. The agency doesn’t intervene in civil cases involving private litigants when a civil statute’s meaning, rather than its constitutionality, is in question, he added. A DoJ spokesman told us the agency would have no comment beyond its filing in Fonovisa. An RIAA spokeswoman told us DoJ intervened in Fonovisa “without any suggestion or communication from us that it was in the interest of the United States to file a brief.”
The SEC said Tues. it charged Infinium Labs’ former CEO Timothy Roberts in a “fraudulent ‘junk fax’ scheme” to promote the company’s stock. The action came after a long SEC investigation that was played down by executives at Infinium, which has been promising to deliver an “always-on” Phantom Game Service and console for years but hasn’t delivered.
Two activist N.J. attorneys filed suit late Fri. against Verizon, alleging the Bell gave subscriber data to the National Security Agency (NSA) in violation of the Telecom Act and the Constitution. In a case that in many ways mirrors an Electronic Freedom Foundation action against AT&T, the lawyers seek damages that could run to the billions (CD April 24 p6). Meanwhile, the govt. filed Sat. for state secrets privilege in the EFF-AT&T case.
The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) voted to launch an investigation into Lexar’s claims that Toshiba’s flash chips and memory cards are infringing 3 of its patents, Lexar said. Lexar filed a complaint with ITC in April seeking a permanent exclusion order barring import of infringing Toshiba NAND flash chips and cards, as well as products that incorporate them. Among the Toshiba products that subject to the ITC probe are 16-bit multi-level cell NAND flash chips and 8-gigabit single level cell and multi- level cell flash chips. Products being investigated include Toshiba’s flash chips. Lexar’s complaint also requests a cease-and-desist order to bar further sales and distribution of Toshiba products already imported into the U.S. The case was referred to ITC administrative law judge Robert Barton, who’s expected to issue an initial decision by early- to mid- 2007. The ITC will likely make a final ruling in 3rd quarter 2007. The ITC investigation is separate from Lexar’s on- going legal battle with Toshiba in Cal. Superior Court. A Santa Clara County court jury awarded Lexar a total of $464.5 million last year after finding Toshiba liable for the theft of flash memory-related trade secrets and violating fiduciary duty. A Cal. state judge, however, ordered a new trial in Dec., finding there was “insufficient evidence” to support “any of the economic and monetary” awards granted by the jury (CED Dec 6 p7).
Phone companies will be summoned before the Senate Judiciary Committee to provide information on reports that they're supplying the National Security Agency phone records of ordinary people in the U.S., Senate Judiciary Committee Chmn. Specter (R-Pa.) said Thurs. A USA Today story citing unidentified sources said AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth are secretly providing the records -- a report that provoked demands for hearings on Capitol Hill.