PORTLAND, Ore.—Iowa-incorporated and located Fraserside IP, a Private Media Group subsidiary, filed a copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Portland, Ore., on Friday, alleging 126 known instances of infringement of its content by BoneProne.com and the so-called "Porn Mafia Family," using a bevy of alleged aliases.
The lawsuit is Fraserside IP v. Jones. The websites used to perpetrate the alleged infringement are also named defendants under these DBAs: BoneProne.com, TubeKings.com and SoCalMovies.com. People named are the abovementioned William Michael Jones, aka Michael Jones, aka Mike Jones, aka Mike Bone, aka BoneProne; and Mindy Jones, aka Mindy Jacobs, aka Queen BoneProne, aka “Porn Mafia Family." Other defendants include La Vista, a Philippines entity; Chin Holdings China, a Panama entity; Marvin Greencarrier; and John Does 1-100 and John Doe Companies 1–100.
The 60-page complaint—which was filed by local attorney Lake Perriguey and Fraserside attorney Chad Belville, who has requested leave to appear pro hac vice before the Oregon court—tells a sadly familiar narrative of infringing activity perpetrated on a large scale through the intentional creation and use of a sophisticated business model whose sole intent is to "capitalize on the illegal dissemination and contribute to the illegal dissemination of infringing works." It also paints a portrait of a digital universe unable to stay technically apace with infringers.
"The Internet, in conjunction with recent significant advances in technology, hardware and software, has resulted in the availability of effective means for circumventing the intellectual property ownership rights in nearly every industry, including adult entertainment," the complaint reads. "The pervasive and intense online infringement is nearly crippling the adult entertainment industry, providing unfettered, unregulated, free access to copyrighted works originally produced by reputable businesses and persons."
The defendants, Fraserside claims, are such businesses and persons. "These infringers operate without any accountability to governmental requirements or regulations, without any actual investment in the creation of the works, and without any commitment to the vision of the future of the industry," it reads. "Nonetheless, these infringers utilize, display, and distribute copyrighted works for which they have no right or proper license for their own commercial and significant financial benefit."
Specifically, claims Fraserside in the complaint, "Defendants use the websites BoneProne, SoCalMovies and TubeKings to gather a vast and extensive collection of infringed films to display and distribute. The websites are one-stop shops for infringing material. Most, if not a very large portion, of the content indexed on or available on the websites is infringing, unauthorized copyrighted content, including Plaintiff’s copyrighted works."
The complaint adds, "The fundamental purpose of the websites is to capitalize on the illegal dissemination and contribute to the illegal dissemination of infringing works. This display and distribution provides Defendant BoneProne with significant monthly revenues, and deprives Plaintiff of the revenue it is rightfully entitled to receive for viewing of its films."
The benefit to BoneProne, according to Fraserside, has been considerable, as has been the downside for copyright owners. "Defendant’s business model of using unauthorized works without compensation to the works’ legitimate owners has significantly contributed to the ability of Defendant to become one of the most visited websites in the world. Defendant offers unauthorized content for free that legitimate competitors must pay for, with extraordinary results. Defendant directs paying customers to competitors with more extraordinary results. An illegitimate business model where the cost of goods sold is zero will be able to drive out legitimate competitors."
The claimed methods used to allegedly acquire the copyrighted videos aren't pretty, either. "TubeKings.com obtains videos, among other methods, by 'scraping/spidering of other tube sites,'" after which, according to the complaint, "Defendants intentionally delete, blur or obscure Plaintiff’s watermarks and logos from Plaintiff’s videos displayed on Defendants’ website, causing consumers to be confused as to the origin of the audio-video content."
Most of the lawsuit is taken up with the detailed listing of "126 instances of infringement, identified by name and registration number" that were "documented as being displayed and distributed on BoneProne.com." Just a few of the Fraserside copyrighted works the complaint lists include Anal Lolitas, Cleopatra, Fatal Orchid and Girls of Desire. All of the instances of infringement contained in the complaint are alleged to have taken place in October and November of 2011. The complaint also notes that none of the defendant sites contain the name of a copyright agent, as required by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
The plaintiff is asking for a jury trial, temporary and permanent enjoinment, penalties related to trademark infringement, enhanced attorney fees, all of the defendants’ domain names, an award for corrective advertising and, by our accounting, at least $19 million in direct infringement penalties ($150,000 multiplied by 126).
The complaint can be read here.
