Click Official ELI Links
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.

Author Topic: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona  (Read 1836 times)

ResearchingIP

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« on: March 20, 2018, 11:21:07 PM »
New lawsuit filed on March 12, 2018, in the District of Arizona -- RM Media Ltd. v. No Debt LLC dba Ultimate Debt Solutions, Malcom Giles, and DOES 1 through 10 inclusive (Case 2:18-cv-00806-DMF). But this one has a twist . . .

This case is subject to the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project, meaning that the parties are subject to a court order to produce initial discovery materials within 30 days of the first responsive pleading. So what? Well, all that needs to happen (and please let it happen) is that the LLC or Mr. Giles need to file an actual answer or substantive response. Once that happens, within 30 days RM Media must produce, and Higbee must undersign as per the Project rules, a host of information many defendants have sought but couldn't get because of the expense of actually litigating to discovery. Check it out:

"The parties must respond to the following Court-issued discovery requests without
awaiting discovery requests from the opposing parties, and at the times set forth above.

1. State the names and, if known, the addresses and telephone numbers of all
persons who you believe are likely to have discoverable information relevant to any
party’s claims or defenses, and provide a fair description of the nature of the information
each such person is believed to possess.
2. State the names and, if known, the addresses and telephone numbers of all
persons who you believe have given written or recorded statements relevant to any
party’s claims or defenses. Unless you assert a privilege or work product protection
against disclosure under applicable law, attach a copy of each such statement if it is in
your possession, custody, or control. If not in your possession, custody, or control, state
the name and, if known, the address and telephone number of each person who you
believe has custody of a copy.
3. List the documents, electronically stored information (“ESI”), tangible
things, land, or other property known by you to exist, whether or not in your possession,
custody or control, that you believe may be relevant to any party’s claims or defenses.
To the extent the volume of any such materials makes listing them individually impracticable, you may group similar documents or ESI into categories and describe the
specific categories with particularity. Include in your response the names and, if known,
the addresses and telephone numbers of the custodians of the documents, ESI, or tangible
things, land, or other property that are not in your possession, custody, or control. For
documents and tangible things in your possession, custody, or control, you may produce
them with your response, or make them available for inspection on the date of the
response, instead of listing them. Production of ESI will occur in accordance with
paragraph C.2 below.
4. For each of your claims or defenses, state the facts relevant to it and the
legal theories upon which it is based.
5. Provide a computation of each category of damages claimed by you, and a
description of the documents or other evidentiary material on which it is based, including
materials bearing on the nature and extent of the injuries suffered. You may produce the
documents or other evidentiary materials with your response instead of describing them.
6. Specifically identify and describe any insurance or other agreement under
which an insurance business or other person or entity may be liable to satisfy all or part
of a possible judgment in the action or to indemnify or reimburse a party for payments
made by the party to satisfy the judgment. You may produce a copy of the agreement
with your response instead of describing it.
7. A party receiving the list described in Paragraph 3, the description of
materials identified in Paragraph 5, or a description of agreements referred to in
Paragraph 6 may request more detailed or thorough responses to these mandatory
discovery requests if it believes the responses are deficient. A party may also serve
requests pursuant to Rule 34 to inspect, copy, test, or sample any or all of the listed or
described items, to the extent not already produced in response to these mandatory
discovery requests, or to enter onto designated land or other property identified or
described."

Unlike Initial Disclosures and the like, this Project actually has some teeth as court-ordered discovery. I'd attach the documents, but I don't know how.


icepick

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 78
    • View Profile
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #1 on: March 23, 2018, 09:17:53 AM »
That's interesting. But unless the defendant has a competent attorney to enforce compliance from Higbee I wouldn't expect much to come out of it.

Could you tell from the complaint any unique facts that led to filing a case? Did they leave the images up? Was it a lot of images? Were they up for a long time? The RM filings are sparse and selective last time I checked.

ResearchingIP

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2018, 03:11:49 PM »
Here is a link to the pertinent docs, and here is the link written out:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g2lofs7x9395mq3/AACUt33-s6jpbUYTQP0cYV3za?dl=0

Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)

  • ELI Defense Team Member
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
    • ExtortionLetterInfo
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2018, 06:48:23 PM »
I'm having a hard time drumming up any sympathy for this defendant, contacted multiple times, yet didn't remove the images in question?
Most questions have already been addressed in the forums, get yourself educated before making decisions.

Any advice is strictly that, and anything I may state is based on my opinions, and observations.
Robert Krausankas

I have a few friends around here..

clist

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • On your side
    • View Profile
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #4 on: March 28, 2018, 09:26:47 PM »
I'm having a hard time drumming up any sympathy for this defendant, contacted multiple times, yet didn't remove the images in question?

I'm having a hard time drumming up any sympathy for this plaintiff.  >:(

Just out of curiosity, has anyone on the forum checked to see if any of these images are registered in the UK?
Knowledge isn't free - you have to pay attention.

Matthew Chan

  • ELI Founder, "Admin-on-Hiatus"
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2764
  • 1st Amendment & Section 230 CDA Advocate
    • View Profile
    • Defiantly
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #5 on: March 29, 2018, 01:00:32 AM »
Thanks for sharing. That is a clever away of sharing documents here.

Quote from: ResearchingIP link=topic=4683.msg21978#msg21978
date=1522264309
Here is a link to the pertinent docs, and here is the link written out:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g2lofs7x9395mq3/AACUt33-s6jpbUYTQP0cYV3za?dl=0
I'm a non-lawyer but not legally ignorant either. Under the 1st Amendment, I have the right to post facts & opinions using rhetorical hyperbole, colloquialisms, metaphors, parody, snark, or epithets. Under Section 230 of CDA, I'm only responsible for posts I write, not what others write.

icepick

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 78
    • View Profile
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #6 on: March 29, 2018, 09:44:05 AM »
Yeah, looks like a continued infringement case where they did not take the images down. Fits the pattern of that first RM filing in California I think it was.

ResearchingIP

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2018, 04:23:24 PM »
Whether the defendant is sympathetic or not, the case is a good opportunity to short-circuit the line of RM Media letters and filings. If defendant files a responsive pleading, Higbee has to roll out a fair amount of discovery quickly. If they do, then it gives the chance to find out about ownership, backing, assignments, etc. If they don't and they decide to drop the case, there are still mechanisms to keep the matter alive -- counterclaim, declaratory judgment, etc.

Of course, any lawyer calling them to offer pro bono or "low bono" assistance here would have to paint the big picture to ensure that the case gets that far. Any ideas if EFF or another organization would back this?

Matthew Chan

  • ELI Founder, "Admin-on-Hiatus"
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2764
  • 1st Amendment & Section 230 CDA Advocate
    • View Profile
    • Defiantly
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2018, 04:29:29 AM »
The one thing about the whole Nick Youngson / RM Media that really irks me is how this guy in the UK is rattling so many cages here in the US with his honeypot strategies from afar. This guy is really asking for it. And the Higbee operation inciting people with some of these outrageous demands.

They are going to hit the wrong defendant one day, and then Nick Youngson and/or the Higbee operation will be on the receiving end of some pain and angst.  Karma can be a real bitch.

We have seen so many copyright extortionists fall, leave the business, or become diminished over the years because the backlash and unintended consequences of their actions took its toll.

All I can say is "they are asking for it". But more than likely, their greed glands pulse too much.  They want the money at all costs.
I'm a non-lawyer but not legally ignorant either. Under the 1st Amendment, I have the right to post facts & opinions using rhetorical hyperbole, colloquialisms, metaphors, parody, snark, or epithets. Under Section 230 of CDA, I'm only responsible for posts I write, not what others write.

icepick

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 78
    • View Profile
Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona
« Reply #9 on: April 01, 2018, 09:58:53 AM »
I completely agree but I'm also thinking that someone who got a Higbee letter (more than one most likely) and was negligent enough to leave the images up anyway probably is not going to be presenting a vigorous defense, or any defense for that matter. If he didn't want to spend 5 minutes to remove the images and avoid the problem I have a hard time seeing this guy spend thousands of dollars on an attorney. And while any minimal pro se answer may be enough to technically trigger the discovery requirements, unless there is an attorney on the defense side holding Higbee's feet to the fire with sanctions etc. for non compliance most judges aren't going to jump in until the defense brings the issue to them to rule on. Just my practical take.

Whether the defendant is sympathetic or not, the case is a good opportunity to short-circuit the line of RM Media letters and filings. If defendant files a responsive pleading, Higbee has to roll out a fair amount of discovery quickly. If they do, then it gives the chance to find out about ownership, backing, assignments, etc. If they don't and they decide to drop the case, there are still mechanisms to keep the matter alive -- counterclaim, declaratory judgment, etc.

Of course, any lawyer calling them to offer pro bono or "low bono" assistance here would have to paint the big picture to ensure that the case gets that far. Any ideas if EFF or another organization would back this?

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 
Official ELI Help Options
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.