It is for this reason that a motion for dismissal based on the “…lack of (the plaintiff’s) subject matter jurisdiction” was recently filed on his behalf and is the subject of a nearing court date on November 27th.

For those of you unfamiliar with the case, Shawn Hogan, CEO of Digital Point Solutions, was accused by the MPAA of downloading a copy of “Meet the Fockers, ” a DVD he actually owns. He refused to accept the traditional $2,500 courtesy settlement fee and instead chose to fight the charges.

I recently had a chance to catch up with Shawn again and ask him a few questions before the upcoming trial.

SOULXTC: You previously sat down for an interview with Chris almost six months ago and now I am doing a follow up piece in light of the fast approaching court date on the 27th of this month.

From looking over the motion for dismissal filed on your behalf in regards to Universal City Studios Productions LLLP claims that you downloaded a pirated copy of “Meet the Fockers,” the brilliant piece of cinematic history that it is, it would seem that your fight is drawing to a close.

In light of all that has happened and especially considering the recent developments in regards to who has the legal mandate to even pursue a claim of copyright infringement, how do you do feel about this sort of anticlimactic ending, and what do you intend to do if the case is dismissed as logic dictates it will?

Shawn: Not sure yet… I’m waiting to see if it’s dismissed or not before looking at my options.

SOULXTC: Do you have any intentions to help others in similar situations, perhaps even simply creating a clearinghouse where others can get better informed of their situation, rights, and legal recourse?

Shawn: It’s a possibility (although nothing concrete at this point)… That’s one of the possible options I may look at.

SOULXTC: You mentioned before how you sort of sympathized with the more than 20,000 people who decided to just settle their John Doe lawsuits when faced with the MPAA and RIAA’s extortionist tactics.

With the continual inability to see a case go to final summary judgment by the courts, your particular case most likely not headed that way either, do you see yourself assisting in seeing such an event happen, either by direct or indirect involvement?

Shawn: Also a possible option that will be evaluated when my case is done.

SOULXTC: What are your plans for the future as they relate to copyright infringement and what advice do you have for others who might find themselves in a similar predicament?

Shawn: I don’t really have any future plans for copyright infringement. It’s all rather boring IMO, so it doesn’t have much interested for me. I don’t really have any advice for anyone finding themselves in other suits, except that they should fight it if they can.

SOULXTC: What do you think will happen on the 27th with your motion for dismissal? Is it a forgone conclusion that it will be successful as it appears it will be, and if so what are your plans afterwards?

Shawn: Nothing is set in stone until it happens, but I would assume it will be dismissed, and I have a feeling the plaintiffs may be thinking the same thing, because they were supposed to send a consultant out to ghost a bunch of computers/drives of mine over a week ago, but that has not happened, and no word if they are still planning on doing that (it’s enough computers that forensic analysis would probably run them $50,000-$70,000).
If they thought it wasn’t going to be thrown out, I wouldn’t think they would have put the brakes on that. But who knows… It could be some other hold-up I suppose {shrug}.
Personally I wish they would hurry up and mirror them so I can give some computers to people that need them.

SOULXTC: Has the whole affair changed you or those around you in any way? How has it affected your future?

Shawn: Only for the better… Indirectly, I’ve made some money on it all. I’ve met people that I only met because of this case, and because of knowing them, I’ve had opportunities for unrelated investments that have worked out.
I don’t think it changed me or affected my future in any way though.

SOULXTC: In closing, I’d like to offer you the opportunity to comment on anything you think I may have left out and also a chance to tell our readers who and what Shawn Hogan is all about.

Haha… I’ll skip that part. I don’t really have anything interesting to add.

SOULXTC: Thanks again for your time and effort Shawn in answering these questions and good luck on the 27th.

Following the interview with Shawn it again became apparent to me just how important it is for people to stand up to the scare tactics of the MPAA and RIAA. With the number of lawsuits filed ranging in the tens of thousands, it really makes you wonder just how many others have been or are innocent but lack the means or wherewithal to prove their case in a court of law. It is extortion pure and simple. Many can neither afford the money nor the time to actually go into court and get true justice!

If you’re a struggling single mother like Patricia Santangelo for instance, how are you to afford a $7,500 USD settlement let alone a decent attorney to defend you at trial? You are basically forced to settle because a legal defense isn’t even an option.

Think about this for a second. It’s almost the year 2007 and still, even in the United States of America, the world’s oldest democracy, a person still can’t get a fair trial. It’s sad but true.

I’ll keep you abreast of what happens with Shawn’s case on the 27th but, it appears he will win his fight. It proves my point that if only others could stand up to the MPAA or the RIAA many more would prevail as well, and then at last true justice would be served.

SOULXTC: “walkin’ the streets of P2P”

Here is the interview:

CH: Ok, we are sitting with Shawn who is currently being sued by the MPAA. Shawn, give us your full name and your website.

SH: My name is Shawn Hogan and my website is DigitalPoint.com

CH: We have been following your case for a while, why don’t you fill us in from the beginning. How were you first contacted by the MPAA?

SH: First I got a notice from my ISP last summer that they got subpoenaed for my info, at this point I didn’t really care too much.

CH: So just for the record, what movie did they accuse you of downloading?

SH: Meet the Fockers, and I actually own the DVD. Pretty ironic.

CH: So you never downloaded Meet the Fockers? Do you download any movies or music at all using p2p software?

SH: No. Not at all.

CH: Ok, so you paid for the DVD, then they accused you of stealing it and demanded $2500.

SH: Exactly. Then in November the MPAA sent me a letter and I was contacted by their little settlement hotline, they called up and demanded $2500. I told them to piss off at which point the lady got all huffy and told me they were going to sue me in federal court and told me I could be liable for hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages and even if you won it would cost more than $2500 to fight it.

CH: This sounds like a pretty clear cut extortion case, what did you do then?

SH: I told her I still wasn’t interested in settling, but she insisted on sending a copy of the settlement agreement. I told her I wasn’t going to sign it or read it so don’t bother. I didn’t hear back from them for a while, then I got served with the actual lawsuit March 21st, telling me I’d been sued in the 9th district court, blah blah blah. At that point I got my attorneys involved to craft a response, and that’s pretty much what’s gone on so far.

CH: So is there an amount they are actually suing you for?

SH: No, they are just suing for “damages.” Actually, after I got served they sent another settlement offer, this time for $3500.

CH: The amount went up?

SH: Yes, apparently they thought that after being served I would be scared and more likely to settle. That’s pretty much where it is now. This Tuesday I am meeting with the Judge for a preliminary hearing to see if we can settle without going to court.

CH: So your position is that you aren’t going to settle and that you didn’t do anything wrong?

SH: Yep. At this point they have pushed me enough to where I’m going to do whatever I can to keep them from dropping the case. I can’t prevent them from dropping it, but I am going to try and force them to go to a full trial. Basically, my lawyers aren’t even going to file a motion to dismiss.

CH: That would be great, it would have to be pretty embarrassing for them to go to a full trial that ends up clearing you completely.

SH: It will set a precedent for everyone else, that’s the whole point. Between the RIAA and the MPAA it’s almost 20,000 people that have settled. All John Doe lawsuits, not a single one has gone to a final judgment. All these people settling for basically what adds up to extortion, I want to put a stop to it. At this point, I don’t care what it costs. If they drop it, I will find something to counter with to keep it in court.

CH: There are options, you could file for defamation of character or something.

SH: There’s that, and there’s also the woman in Oregon who is suing the RIAA under the RICO statute, the old gangster racketeering laws. Surprisingly it hasn’t been thrown out of court and it was filed six months ago, so maybe that’s an idea.

CH: Interesting point, do you know how that case is doing?

SH: A little bit, it’s still pending. I know her racketeering complaint hasn’t been thrown out, after six months. She filed the counter complaint in November and it’s still ongoing so… I know she’s going to try to go to trial.

At this point the food came and we decided to follow up after his “Early Neutral Evaluation Conference” which was May 23rd. I spoke with Shawn that afternoon, and it sounded like another waste of his time. Basically the point of the hearing is to avoid trial by seeing if the Judge can negotiate a settlement. Not that the MPAA offered it, but the Judge asked Shawn if he would settle for $500, Shawn said no and reiterated his desire for a full trial, and heeeeere we go. The Judge said the trial was “fasttracked,” meaning it might get into court before the end of the year. Stay tuned!

Digg It!