8 Studios Sue in Dallas Court to Stop ‘Mass’ Infringer’s Illegal Streaming Services
William Freemon is a “mass” content pirate who operates “an extensive and commercially scaled network” of illegal streaming services that offers unauthorized access to live channels and VOD streams of copyrighted movies and TV shows, alleged eight studios in an infringement complaint Wednesday (docket 3:24-cv-00733) in U.S. District Court for Northern Texas in Dallas.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Freemon makes money by selling subscriptions to his infringing services directly to the public, but he pays nothing to content owners “for the copyrighted works he exploits,” said the complaint. The defendant also recruits resellers who sell subscriptions to their customers, “expanding the reach of Freemon’s infringing enterprise.” it said. The plaintiffs are Amazon, Columbia Pictures, Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Sony Pictures, Universal City Studios and Warner Bros. Entertainment.
Freemon has a “long history” of illegally profiting from “content theft,” said the complaint. He has engaged in mass infringement since at least 2016 when he started selling “jailbroken” Fire TV streaming devices that were “illegally modified” to allow users to access unauthorized content on their televisions, it said. He then moved on to “illicit streaming services” that charge users to stream popular and unlicensed movies, shows and television channels, it said.
Streaming TV Now, one of Freemon’s most popular illegal streaming services, charges a $20 monthly subscription fee for access to more than 11,000 illegal channels and a VOD service that offers more than 27,000 movies and 9,000 TV series, said the complaint. This is infringement of the plaintiffs’ copyrighted works “on a massive scale,” it said. Because the Dallas resident has “sidestepped the obligation” to pay for works for streaming -- and therefore doesn’t abide by any restrictions on use or pay any fees -- “he competes on unfair terms,” it said.
Freemon has amassed an “enormous library” of content, and offers consumers discounted prices “because he pays nothing for the content he steals,” said the complaint. This “undercutting” harms the plaintiffs’ “legitimate” businesses, “streaming or otherwise,” it said.
The defendant knows he has no right “to do any of this” but has demonstrated a “willful disregard” for his illegal actions, said the complaint. The plaintiffs tried to get Freemon to stop infringing “without the need for court intervention,” but he “refused to cooperate in shutting the infringing services down,” it said.
The plaintiffs sent Freemon a “notice letter” in February 2023 demanding that he cease operating the infringing services, but he wasn’t cooperative, said the complaint. He didn’t take down the infringing services and instead “offered unsubstantiated claims that he transferred the associated domains,” it said.
The plaintiffs spent months negotiating with Freemon, said the complaint. Based on the lack of substantial change to the infringing services in the “intervening times,” including that the respective main domains are still hosted with the same hosting provider, Amarutu Technology, Freemon is “likely still controlling” the infringing domains, it said. His evasiveness “is particularly concerning in light of his long history of willful infringement,” it said.
His ongoing infringement “steals consumers and revenue” from the plaintiffs and “usurps” their right to control their copyrighted works “and right to determine the terms on which they are provided to consumers,” said the complaint. Without court intervention, these harms “will only grow as Freemon and those in concert with him expand both their customer bases and their illegal content offerings,” it said.
The complaint seeks maximum statutory damages, plus injunctive relief to stop defendant’s illegal conduct. It also seeks restitution of Freemon’s “unlawful proceeds,” plus an order requiring that his infringing goods and articles “be impounded and destroyed.”