MPAA Finally Sues The Wrong Guy

Nine times out of ten, you can just walk up to anyone on the street and punch them right in the face, scot-free. Hey, go try it. The nonconfrontational pansy on the other end will sputter impotently for a few minutes, speechless as he tries to comprehend the unexpected development, then finally squeal, “Hey, man! Like what the fuck!”

Unfortunately, one time out of ten, you manage to punch a UFC Fighting Champion in the face, who proceeds to kick you so hard your spine goes exploding out of your body.

The MPAA has gone around randomly punching a lot of people in the face, then asking them for their wallets on top of that. But they finally sued the wrong guy: Shawn Hogan, the multi-millionaire CEO of Digital Point Solutions, who was accused of downloading an illegal copy of Meet the Fockers off BitTorrent. He didn’t and he’s ready to take the bastards down.

“They’re completely abusing the system,” Hogan said about the MPAA’s extortionist legal tactics. “I would spend well into the millions on this.” Attaboy, Shawn! Kick their skull out of their fucking heads.

Shawn Hogan, Hero [Wired]

Edit: We originally kept calling the MPAA the RIAA in this post. It’s been corrected, but honestly, same difference.


Edit Your Comment

  1. John says:

    The article makes no mention of the RIAA, only the MPAA.

  2. something_amazing says:

    Call me crazy, I was unaware that the MPAA was pursuing an aggressive strategy of suing people on bittorrent. Maybe they were upset that the RIAA was stealing their thunder.

  3. This is great news. Love the analogy by the way.

  4. Mary Marsala with Fries says:

    YES!! I’ve been waiting for years for this to happen. This we’ve-got-money, we’ll-push-around-anybody BS has to stop. PLUS, a determination needs to be made as to whether these people (MPAA & RIAA) are selling a product (the disk) or licensing a work (the music/movie). Because, simplified, if it’s the former (selling discs), then they can’t complain no matter what you do with it (you own it); and if it’s the latter (licensing content), then if a disc or DVD ever breaks, they have to replace it for free. They’ve managed to get the best of both worlds for a long time now, and a correction is WAY overdue.

  5. Papercutninja says:

    Since when do they sue people for using bitorrent? i thought they only went after the trackers.

  6. Morgan says:

    I would think it’d be hard for them to be selling you a license without you ever signing some sort of license agreement. This was something that it was easy for software developers to get around (since they could have you agree to the license as a prerequisite of installing the software), but when I buy a DVD and pop it into a player without ever seeing a liscense agreement, I was just sold a disc.

  7. Hitchcock says:

    A law firm out of California was doing something almost identicle. They were threatening to sue small business owners over mistakes in advertising or paperwork, but offering to drop the case if the small business owner paid $5,000. They, just like the RIAA and MPAA suits, would point out it was cheaper to settle then to fight it, so why not just pay. The law firm ended up taking over several floors of an office building. The AG looked into it, as well as the bar association, and every lawyer with that company lost their ability to practice as a lawyer in California.

    Why can’t the same happen to the attorneys working for the RIAA and MPAA?