Summary of Legal Merit
Contributory Copyright Infringement
- Merit: Substantial at the pleading stage.
- The Tenth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal, holding that Greer plausibly alleged that Joshua Moon, operator of Kiwi Farms, knowingly encouraged or materially contributed to copyright infringement by users. Notably, Greer alleged Moon reposted Greer's takedown notices, mocked them publicly, and refused removal.
- Current status: Remanded for discovery and potential trial. The claim now moves forward on firm legal footing.
Electronic Communications Harassment
- Merit: None.
- Greer brought this claim under Utah Code § 76-9-201, but the statute provides no private right of action. The court dismissed it with prejudice.
- Assessment: The claim was clearly outside the law and should not have been filed.
False Light / Defamation
- Merit: None due to statutory immunity.
- These claims were dismissed under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which provides immunity to website operators for third-party content. Moon, as a service provider, was not legally responsible for the speech of others.
- Assessment: These claims contradict well-established federal immunity law.
Procedural Conduct (Discovery, Sanctions, Motions)
- Merit: Poor procedural behavior by plaintiff.
- The court sanctioned Greer for failing to disclose key evidence and witnesses and for repeatedly delaying discovery. His noncompliance was described as willful and unjustified, leading to monetary sanctions and court orders compelling discovery.
- Multiple motions—seeking stays, challenging venue, and resisting sanctions—were routinely denied and often deemed meritless or procedurally flawed.
Indicators of Frivolous Litigation
While Greer’s contributory copyright claim has some
real merit, several aspects of the broader litigation raise concerns:
Filing Unwinnable Claims
- The harassment and defamation claims had no legal basis from the outset (e.g., invoking a criminal statute with no private cause of action, ignoring CDA § 230).
- This suggests either a misunderstanding of basic legal doctrine or a willingness to use litigation to harass or retaliate.
Procedural Misuse
- Greer was sanctioned for discovery misconduct, including failing to disclose key evidence.
- He filed repetitive motions, including several to stay proceedings, all of which were denied, and which delayed litigation without advancing new arguments.
Tactical Litigation Behavior
- His legal filings often attempted to relitigate already-decided issues or sought to relitigate matters unrelated to the one surviving claim.
- Courts found no substantial basis in his procedural complaints, reinforcing a pattern of strategic obstruction rather than diligent prosecution of valid claims.
Final Assessment
| Category | Evaluation |
|---|
| Substantive Legal Claims | One valid (copyright), others meritless |
| Procedural Conduct | Repeatedly deficient, some willfully improper |
| Signs of Frivolousness | Yes, for non-copyright claims and conduct |
| Overall Litigation Merit | Mixed: One claim justifies suit, others do not |
Greer’s lawsuit is partially meritorious—his contributory copyright infringement claim survives appellate scrutiny and has a plausible factual basis. However, the remaining claims were
legally groundless and
dismissed with prejudice. His procedural behavior, characterized by
noncompliance, excessive motions, and sanctioned conduct, further detracts from the integrity of the litigation.
Therefore: While this is
not a wholly frivolous lawsuit due to the one viable claim,
much of the litigation—both in content and conduct—bears hallmarks of frivolous or vexatious use of the courts, warranting critical scrutiny going forward.
