Copyright Trolls Stunned as Courts Begin asking for more than just an Ip ByBill Toulas-December 18, 2018.968 Court rules that an Ip address is not adequate evidence to proceed with a copyright infringement case More courts in the Us follow suit citing the original ruling but none explain what the evidence is expected to consist of. The decision resonated across the world, and many courts across the Us have started to seek more concrete evidence on the defendants ‘ identity. Copyright trolls aren’t sure what this “more evidentiary ence” would be, so they started to unveil all the data they have from browsing history tracking to advanced geo-location information. Internet providers are also forced to hand over every information they have on the defendants so that courts end up with an enormous pile of questionable facts. Many courts support this while others do not and the situation appears to have taken a turn towards the latter alternative following the decision of the Court of Appeal. Judge Nancy Koppe replied as follows in a recent copyright infringement case in Nevada: “In the sense of BitTorrent copyright infringement, the Ninth Circuit recently held that a plaintiff bears the burden of making factual claims that establish a reasonable inference that the defendant is the infringer. Therefore a complaint that traces infringement of a particular Ip address and pleads that the Ip address is registered with the defendant is insufficient to state a claim.” Simply put Us courts are filled with BitTorrent related lawsuits so that they may feel they have to do something to filter out blatant copyright troll claims and only proceed with su-based cases Malibu Media has even been barred for process manipulation by one of the most active copyright trolls in Northern California courts. Although no court has explained what the additional evidence should be in order to increase the complexity of the litigation action. Of course, copyright trolls will continue their litigation but the proof they generate will be much more comprehensive now. That leaves truth on two directions to be pursued. Either the copyright trolls will impose more stringent regulations on internet user activity tracking and reporting (by the Isp providers) or the litigation will cease or become much more limited to specific people who handle substantial damages. The first path will demolish everything that remains of user privacy rights while the second path will bring things into a saneer sense.