Fans of That Randall S. “The Unhinged Attorney” Newman, Esq, were surprised on Sunday with his new copyright related filing on behalf of YouTuber John Filax as it targets someone not involved in the so-called anti-auditing community.
Attorney Newman was quick to comment on the situation to ReallyCoolNews, “The defendant’s single infringing video has been viewed more than 84 million times. That reach magnifies the stakes of this case: by filing a false counter-notification under penalty of perjury, he forced Plaintiff to seek judicial relief simply to vindicate rights Congress expressly provided. Section 512(f) was enacted to deter this exact conduct—knowingly making misrepresentations to compel restoration of infringing content. Mr. Filax therefore seeks both a declaration that the video is infringing and a finding that Defendant’s counter-notice was unlawful. Mr. Filax will remain vigilant in protecting his rights, and this action sends a clear message: misuse of the DMCA process to shield piracy, particularly on a viral scale, will not be tolerated.”
Newman and Filax’s target is a channel called “Bodycam Action” (@BodycamActionofficial) which has 121,000 subscribers to 138 videos which is run by Muhammad Tayyab.
The pair allege that in November of 2024, Tayyab took the contents of a 2017 video posted by Filax and reposted it as a 1 minute and 34 second short form video on the Bodycam Action channel. The video adds background music but otherwise is shares Filax’s video unaltered and has been seen 85 million times since it was posted.
Newman and Filax allege that Tayyab misrepresented himself in filing out his DMCA counternotice.
In that counternotice, Tayyab states:
“The original content used was from a video titled “TPA Police Stop The Wrong Guy _ READ THE DESCRTIPTION!”, and I acknowledge that it was included in my video. However, I believe the use of this content qualifies under fair use. I significantly transformed the original footage by: Adding my own original images including captions and text overlays incorporating background music Making edits to structure and presentation that provide new context and meaning. My video is not a re-upload, but rather a repurposed and original work that aims to inform and engage viewers in a different way than the source material.”
Tayyab’s use of the same content without significant changes, commentary or further modification is one of the claims against the video. The other is that the roughly 90-second video has 85,000,000 views, compared to 10,000,000 views for the original video.
Newman and Filax claim that the increased exposure has brought about significant market harm to the original video. Furthermore, Tayyab’s video does not give credit or a linkback to Filax’s video and presents itself as an original work by the creator of the channel.
The pair are seeking a permanent takedown of the video, monetary damages and a declaratory judgment.
When confronted in his Newman’s Own forum on our ReallyCoolNewsWire Discord server, attorney Newman dismissed allegations that the Bodycam Action video and the entire Bodycam Action channel were not monetized.
Newman announced that he was not concerned about the monetization status of the channel or video as he could not get infringement damages as Filax did not register the copyright on the original video.
The attorney said the lawsuit may give Tayyab incentive to settle quickly and remove the video in question. A victory with declaratory judgement could also be used in future lawsuits against those accused of similar actions.
Tayyab lists a Pakistan address in his DMCA counterclaim but has agreed to service in the judicial district in which YouTube is located by submitting the counterclaim.
So they saw 85 mill views and said “Jackpot”.
They rushed to sue and demanded money!
Its all about the money. The scam only works if there is a payday. A lawsuit, a real lawsuit could cost north of 100K and they are going to do it for peanuts. They forgot to look and see if anyone made any money. Opps. This is not about any high ideas. Its about money. Tell them no and let them sue. The judge might even award them money… 1 $.
Since no money was made from the video, they cannot get that money back but hey, this is the quality of these scam artists. They are stupid and incompetent but they are persistent.
@TheDMCALawyer
@RobertFortin1405 You obviously don’t know how a default works. Do you ever say anything that isn’t stupid and incorrect Mr. Fortin the Moron?
My reply
@TheDMCALawyer As a usenet troll, i clearly do not know anything. Sadly I am not pretending to be a lawyer either. I am not here to threaten and intimidate people. I am not here to file suits on people thinking easy money only to find out there is no money to be made, take cases to court with a single, one page contract that I have not read and clearly have not understood if i had read it to begin with. I am not taking a case to court with all the evidence set up by the other guy so he can string you along to film yet another humiliation video for all usenet to laugh at you and your client. I am not filing three and fourth amended complaints because I clearly do not know what I am doing or what my suit is all about. Sending notices by DHL for service without asking the judges permission cause You know better. Trying to sue for copyright infringement on things that have little or nor protection to begin with, you know that video with the cop, ya that, everything the cop says on video is not copyrightable. How about trying to get lawyer fees on a recent copywritten video that has long since passed out of use and favour. Oh, the week of infringe might earn you pennies if it was a creative work, but you are suing under an educational News story video, which has the lowest copyright protection/
I could go on with all the things, I know nothing about but clearly so much more then you do.
The only thing funnier then I not know anything is that I the usenet troll, who knows nothing, is kicking you around the block, to the point that everyone case see just how out of your league you are battling a know nothing usenet troll. Imagine how much trouble you are in when faced with a lawyer who does know what they are talking about.
Do your clients know how badly you keep getting the short end of these conversations with a know nothing usenet troll?
I admit to knowing nothing. I am just waiting for you to accept that you also do not know anything and worse, knowing even less than a know nothing usenet troll. Only thing is, my not knowing anything is hurting no one. Not a single person. Your clearly not knowing the law is hurting all those clients who have put their faith in your false front telling them you know things when clearly, as all can see by the many, oh so many errors, screw up and general malpractice you call a career. Did you warn your clients that when you lose every case, your clients, not you, your clients are all on the hook for all those lawyers fees that you needlessly cost them? But certainly, I accept that I know nothing as a usenet troll, its to be expected. See, this would be yet another thing that I know nothing about and I can admit to, that you cannot even say for yourself. You just keep showing it to everyone in all the things you are doing. Every half mast filing, every poor lolsuit you file. Every mistaken utterance you do. All of which shows where I am a usenet troll, I have no need to get anything right. You however are going to cost your clients when you lose in court.
And Just to point out to you. When you do, as you are doing it, i will still be here laughing at you and making a mockery of all your faults, errors and basically everything you are trying to do. See, the best thing here, is all those threats you made, all that intimidation only works when people are afraid of you. When people are scared of you. However, when people can only laugh at you and your mistakes, oh so many mistakes, when they can only giggle at the mere hint you will sue them, then there is no easy payment, there is no free cash and there is no dignity in the humiliation you get to earn as you reputation just by how badly you have handled all these cases.
And in the end, as you keep saying, If i am wrong about everything. So what? I am, as you, yourself have pointed out, I am a know nothing usenet troll. So it wont matter and if i am right, well then, if i am right, what then does that make you?