P2P defendants demand legal fees from Far Cry filmmaker
Found on Ars Technica on Thursday, 16 September 2010
A group of defendants have hired several DC lawyers to file a joint motion demanding that the subpoenas in the case be quashed, that the defendants be dismissed from the litigation, and that Boll's production company cover their legal expenses.
The Omnibus Motion argues that the DC court has no personal jurisdiction over these particular defendants, since none of them live or work in DC-and neither do their ISPs.
Because the plaintiff's actions caused these Does to incur legal fees defending themselves in a distant court, "an award of attorneys' fees and costs in their favor is appropriate."
It might not even be an accident that the case has been filed in DC. Although defendants (correctly) claim that it's trivial to figure out which ISP is responsible for an IP and which court is most appropriate, the plaintiff might have hoped that, thanks to the absence of the defendants due to the distance, a default judgement in their favor would be granted.