You know, if you'd take a few minutes to read the documents I upload, you wouldn't really have this question. Here is, for example, the order directing this to happen. If you want a more detailed answer, it's because that's part of their job, and specifically as it relates to people who file IFP, the court may order the Marshal to do it (to insure the plaintiff is not burdened by the costs) as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorize the court to do just that
I’m new to the thread but I’d just like to suggest that when you add the bit about him stabbing and then suing his father in the happenings thread you should also include the bit that he gobbles like a turkey. It’s so fucking weird and he should be known for it just as much.
Yeah, but it's not as funny.
yeah, if that's the case it's still transformative by introducing to a new community with different possible views. Zell should be fine, still retarded though.
But who is to say that Zell is the same person as the person he subpoenaed? Zell could be one of the older members of his channel who downloaded it and uploaded it here. Not the person that joined the same day. Without verification that the kiwi farms user is the same user he requested from YouTube then how can he be 100% sure? Unless he specifically stated that as well in which case he’s beyond retarded and his best bet is to try to hook up with that legal fund and get help paying a good attorney.
That's not how Fair Use works, not entirely. That'd certainly be a factor in determination (probably under the fourth factor), but the analysis doesn't stop there. I don't believe that the first factor even considers situations like this, and so it is unlikely to be transformative (not all transformative uses are fair uses, just like not all non-transformative uses are unfair uses)
Zell stated that he was the one to buy it and upload it here (see my post you are replying to). If somehow someone different was served, well then, good for Zell, bad for that other person, who will have to assert he was the wrong party
Zell paid him the dollar, so really any loss is only if someone actually viewed this on here
Getting sued by a psychopath over A-Logging on the Farms?
He touched a cow on a fucking gmail account. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep about it.
> guy sends tracable money to a vexatious litigant lolcow for content
How is he supposed to have responded a week before even getting served?
Could they argue that each view was only worth a dollar than? The view was deleted and I don't think it got any direct traffic.
Fuck if I know.
In terms of actual damages, sure, each view would be a dollar. But he's going for statutory damages of which the lower limit is $200 (for non-willful infringement) or $750 (willful infringement) and the upper level is $30 000 (non-willful) or $150 000(willful).
Should have tried for the $750. He'd actually get his first win in life.
