Jane is in her 70s, a retired widow who spends her days doing volunteer work in the East Bay and fussing over her grandchildren. She also downloads porn illegally over BitTorrent.

That, at least, is the claim in an April lawsuit against her and dozens of other Jane and John Does by a Chicago law firm that's been busily filing similar cases around the country.

It's also made a habit of strongly suggesting that these "digital pirates" settle out of court for several thousand dollars. Letters to defendants helpfully remind them the amount is below what they'd probably pay in attorney's fees and that settling would avoid publicly linking their names to pornography.

This particular Jane (who didn't want her real name used for that very reason) said she's never downloaded porn and doesn't know what a BitTorrent is. She can't afford an attorney to make her case, but she's not about to settle either.

"It smacks of extortion," she said.

Some legal observers agree.

Steele Hansmeier PLLC filed the case against "Does 1-46" in U.S. District Court in San Francisco on behalf of Hard Drive Productions. The growing law firm has now lodged complaints on behalf of adult companies against about 10,000 defendants, partner John Steele said.

When asked about the allegations that their tactics amount to a shakedown, Steele said his firm is simply fighting back against the widespread copyright theft that threatens to put his clients out of business.

Other porn companies, media businesses and law firms have embraced similar strategies, which San Francisco digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation describes as "copyright trolling."

Low settlement fees

The mass filings, embarrassing allegations and low settlement fees are all carefully calibrated to get people to pay up, regardless of whether they've done anything wrong, said Matt Zimmerman, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

"It puts these defendants in a tough spot, especially with the coercive element of the porn allegation," he said.

The June letter to Jane emphasized that copyright owners can recover up to $150,000 in damages per file. It mentions the possibility of naming her several times. And it invited her to quickly and quietly settle matters by paying $3,400 via credit card.

A law firm representative followed up with a direct phone call to Jane just before the settlement offer expired.

To be clear, many - and maybe even most - of those accused in these cases probably downloaded the files. But it's easy to imagine scenarios where some didn't, yet still feel pressured to settle.

Like, say, a widow in her 70s who, when asked by a reporter, didn't know whether her wireless Internet service was password protected. She did know, however, that a handful of young men lived next door.

The letter from Steele suggests that someone else using an unsecured wireless network isn't a viable legal defense for the account holder, noting that downloaders of child pornography have employed this excuse to no avail.

But that's deliberately misleading, Zimmerman said.

"There is no legal doctrine that says you're responsible for what somebody else does on your Internet connection," he said.

In fact, there are examples of the precise opposite occurring.

Open networks

Earlier this year, charges were dropped against a man in Buffalo, N.Y., accused of downloading child pornography, after police turned their attention to a neighbor allegedly using the man's open Wi-Fi network.

Jane said she'll go to trial without an attorney if necessary and "throw herself on the mercy of the court."

"I'd say to the judge, 'I have no idea how this happened,' " she said. "If Sony can get hacked, if the Pentagon can get hacked, my goodness, what chance does an individual have?"

But Steele's not buying such excuses. In an interview, he said anyone who fails to secure their Wi-Fi is as responsible for the subsequent crimes or tragedies as a parent who leaves a loaded gun within reach of a 3-year old.

Of course, nobody dies when the teenager next doors nabs a wireless signal for a glimpse of breasts.

None of the cases pursued by Steele Hansmeier has reached a final verdict at trial, but the firm has moved forward with claims against individuals, Steele said. Most people simply decide to settle, he added.

Steele stressed that the vast majority of these people have committed a crime and the few who haven't have every opportunity to defend themselves.

"There's no sort of sneaky, in-the-shadows efforts here," he said.