Copyright Owner Wants Court To Ban The Word ‘Copyright Troll’

For many years, copyright owners and pirates have met in court to negotiate infringements, and among the former, there are also those who have made lawsuits for their business model. They’re called trolls, but they don’t like to hear it.

The name copyright troll has long since become established in the scene, as it describes those companies whose sole purpose or sole source of income is the enforcement of rights. That includes Strike 3 Holdings, which is an adult entertainment company, which is pornography.

Strike 3 Holdings typically sues people whose Internet connections have been used to download copyrighted content via BitTorrent. Normally, these warnings are settled out of court, and the users then buy themselves free from the allegations – and that is also the actual goal of the plaintiffs because here you can avoid costly disputes in court.

Resistance Is There

However, occasionally a defendant decides to fight back. That is now the case, according to TorrentFreak, as an individual identified as “John Doe” has decided to file a counterclaim against Strike 3 Holdings. What is even more unusual is that there will probably also be a trial before a jury in Florida.

Both parties have submitted their pre-trial statements and the case centers on whether or not “John Doe” downloaded or shared 36 porn videos. For Strike 3, the matter is clear, they want plenty of evidence against the man. He is said to have tried, among other things, to destroy evidence by “mishandling” the hard drive and rebooting his computer.

Strike 3 also wants more proof of this, but also defends itself against the term “copyright troll”. Because it has been requested that this designation should not be used during the hearing. According to the copyright owners, the term has negative connotations and they don’t want the jury to be swayed by this kind of “prejudiced” language: “Insults have no place in civil disputes,” the Strike 3 attorneys said.

They also want to exclude blogs, media, and other Internet reports from the potential pool of evidence, as these contain subjective comments and could have a similar impact.