Nude Nuns with Big Guns

[RWebb]

Two Firms Battle for Right to Sue Nude Nuns Downloaders | Threat Level | Wired.com

[techweenie]

I saw the trailer for this film at the Boobs and Blood Film Festival. Have to say, the best thing about it was the title.

[RWebb]

interesting inner'lectual property issue tho

[nynor]

not really. it is extortion. plain and simple. the way they are doing the lawsuit is illegal.

[wdfifteen]

I love the irony of suing for intellectual property rights over a movie with the name Nude Nuns with Big Guns. Maybe they were really, really smart nude nuns.

[john70t]

"The outcome could mean big bucks for the winner. The Copyright Act allows up to $150,000 in damages for each copyright violation."
....and the actual damages sustained by the studio was a loss of $5.00 revenue.

The media world didn't end when tapes and vcr recorders were deemed legal.
It ended when movie and cd prices shot up to $25.

This is the problem when corporate and judicial laws and enforcement are, um, a little biased for certain businesses. Those owners seem to have an extrordinary amount of influence....
Meanwhile, have any anti-stalking or hacking charges been filed against these potential plaintiffs?

[nynor]

i have peer block on my computer. you should see the stream of folks trying to ping my machine.

[cgarr]

Yea ping this! I use my neighbors!

[rusnak]

Somehow, LiLo in "Machete" comes to mind.

[nynor]

that is a common strategy. my wi-fi is locked tight.

[nynor]

Watch 'Nude Nuns With Big Guns' Trailer Brings Nunsploitation! Video | Break.com

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by nynor

not really. it is extortion. plain and simple. the way they are doing the lawsuit is illegal.

eh?

[nynor]

one cannot file a lawsuit naming thousands of defendants. this is exactly what they have done in the hopes that people will simply mail a check for $2000 to make it go away. that there are two companies doing the exact same thing over the same stupid movie arguing that they own the same 'property' is just a sideshow in this circus. the one company defaulted on a loan wherein they put up 'nude nuns', and some other tardfests, as collateral. the real issue is the legal precedent that these donuts would be making. further complicating things is the fact that most of these people being sued do not live in nor did they commit the alleged piracy in the jurisdiction wherein the suits were brought. this is also improper and needs to be quashed.

frankly, i am not even sure why you think it is interesting. it seems pretty clear cut to me, shoving all the lawsuit nonsense to the side, that the company that defaulted on the loan lost the rights to the 'movies'.

[RWebb]

I guess I missed that in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

[nynor]

you must have.

[nynor]

Nude Nuns Judge Questions Mass BitTorrent Lawsuit | Threat Level | Wired.com

“show cause why the Doe defendants should not be severed and/or dismissed from this action based on improper joinder of parties or lack of personal jurisdiction,”

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/04/nuns-order-to-show-cause.pdf

and this is why the above is a problem:

(1)whether the requirements for permissive joinder of each of the 5,865 Doe defendants have been
met under Rule 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and (2) “whether permissive joinder
would ‘comport with the principles of fundamental fairness’ or would result in prejudice to either
side.”

[rusnak]

You an L1, Dr Webb? Heaven help us all, lol.

[Schumi]

Her guns aren't nearly big enough.

Her boobs I mean. The actual guns, whatever, man.

[rusnak]

That reminds me, I need to learn to like nice girls.

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by rusnak

You an L1, Dr Webb? Heaven help us all, lol.

I was years ago.

As usual, nutnor is confused -- proper joinder may or may not exist. I doubt that nutnor even knows what that is, but it is assuredly not "illegal" to sue numerous defendants in a single action. Indeed, the Federal Rules aim for a single action rather than a large number of separate law suits.

No charge -- this time.