Some of the most widely used private torrent trackers for pirating movies suspect that a banned user may have posed as a filmmaker protecting copyrights in a failed attempt to seek revenge.
TorrentFreak has been tracking this story closely, reporting last September that an alleged independent filmmaker named Matthew Schneider sued six private trackers for infringing copyrights on some films that he supposedly made. Trackers targeted include PassThePopcorn, BroadcasTheNet, and HDBits. For months, the filmmaker sought to get Cloudflare to unmask operators of the trackers through a copyright fight, which went on until trackers alerted the court last month that Schneider appeared to be an impostor.
In a sworn declaration, the actual filmmaker behind the movies cited in the complaint wrote that he had no association to the plaintiff in the case. “I am not involved in, nor have I ever appeared in, this case,” Schneider wrote.
To keep the copyright fight alive, the plaintiff swore, “I’m a different Matthew Schneider.” He then claimed to have coincidentally made three films with the same exact titles as the other filmmaker’s movies, Split: A Film Anthology, Do Us Part, and Orlando Gloom, Always the Same.
For the judge, Andrea R. Wood, this unusual turn in what could have been a major case was unexpected. TorrentFreak noted that this was the first copyright case to target “multiple prominent private torrent trackers,” and the judge warned that the plaintiff could face sanctions if the private trackers’ allegations were true and he filed a frivolous claim with intent to deceive the court.
As pressure mounted on the plaintiff to clarify his complaint, he abruptly decided to voluntarily dismiss the claims, TorrentFreak reported Tuesday. But that last-minute move might not save him from being sanctioned.
At a hearing that TorrentFreak attended, one of the attorneys representing one of the tracker operators, Erin Russell, confirmed that at least one defendant would be seeking sanctions.
Although the plaintiff maintained at the hearing that his legal name is Matthew Schneider, the defense raised an alternate theory the trackers have about his true identity.
Linked to the email address that the plaintiff used in his self-represented court filings, an account was found that showed he was “not a stranger to private torrents” and was likely banned for selling or trading invites, TorrentFreak reported. Most likely, the plaintiff is a disgruntled user of private trackers who “bears ill will” over their likely blacklisting, Russell suggested, without showing evidence.
For the private trackers, sanctioning the plaintiff will depend on proving more than just that he’s not who he says he is, though. The court will need to know his actual identity to form a judgment and know who to sanction, which Russell said at the hearing will be a practical challenge for private trackers frustrated by these developments.
At the next hearing on October 2, the plaintiff will seemingly have one last chance to defend his claims as genuine. Not only will he be required to appear on camera, showing defendants who they’re really up against for the first time, but the judge is also supposed to review one of the films that he allegedly made that shares a title with one of the other Schneider’s movies.
It’s “an odd situation,” Judge Wood told defense counsel at the hearing, where the plaintiff promised to end delays and send over a copy of his movie, as well as enter a sworn affidavit in response to the sanctions motion.
