Under scrutiny from a judge, pressure from regulators, and bomb threats from the public, notorious UK antipiracy lawyer Andrew Crossley is getting out of the business. In the UK's special intellectual property court today, Crossley presented a statement saying that he was done sending out "speculative invoicing" letters demanding around £500 from accused peer-to-peer file-swappers, many of whom have totally denied the charges.

After years of delay, Crossley recently brought a raft of cases against alleged copyright infringers. Instead of securing straightforward legal victories, Crossley ran headfirst into the buzzsaw that was Judge Birss QC, who bundled the cases together and then blasted Crossley's request for default judgment. It turned out that three of these initial eight cases weren't even in default, while in three more, there was no evidence the defendants had ever been notified. But the case was so badly brought that the judge wouldn't even grant default judgment in the two cases where it might be warranted, pointing out that it was an unsettled legal question whether people were liable for activities committed over their unsecured WiFi networks or activities committed by others using their accounts.

Crossley then tried to dismiss the suits—but the judge wouldn't let him off the hook that fast. The defendants might want to pursue counterclaims against him for damages and costs, and the judge himself appeared quite interested in the affairs of ACS:Law. At a follow-up hearing today, he grilled the plaintiffs about their tactics and about why a new firm called GCB was now sending out letters that looked almost identical to Crossley's.

UK editor Dinah Greek, who was at the hearing, tweeted:

Judge birss becoming more incredulous as hearing continued. Copies of documents acs law should have provided him were 'in storage ' Issue of gcb brought to judge birss attn. He said 'not happy about this' & 'wants to know wot is going on'

"I want to tell you that I am not happy," said Judge Birss a bit later, according to the BBC. "I am getting the impression with every twist and turn since I started looking at these cases that there is a desire to avoid any judicial scrutiny."

Crossley denied this, though his disinterest in pursuing actual court cases led to many such accusations, even in the House of Lords. Early last year, Lord Lucas of Crudwell and Dingwall accused Crossley of behavior that "amounts to blackmail... The cost of defending one of these things is reckoned to be £10,000. You can get away with asking for £500 or £1,000 and be paid on most occasions without any effort having to be made to really establish guilt. It is straightforward legal blackmail."

Crossley eventually had a statement read to Judge Birss: "I have ceased my work I have been subject to criminal attack. My e-mails have been hacked. I have had death threats and bomb threats It has caused immense hassle to me and my family."

Mo' money, mo' problems



This "hassle" ramped up last year when a denial of service attack took down his ACS:Law corporate website; when it came back up, the site had exposed Crossley's e-mails, which were promptly posted to the Web. The e-mails showed exactly how the business worked, complete with Crossley's detailed spreadsheets, financial projections, and huge lists of names and addresses of those accused of downloading porn.

The leak has Crossley in hot water with UK data protection authorities; he's also in trouble with the Solicitors Regulatory Authority, which is investigating his activities.

The e-mails also revealed the human side of the "settlement letter" business. Some of the accused were guilty, but many others expressed total bafflement.

I have today received a legal notification from you that a pornographic film was downloaded from my internet connection in October 2009. I immediately phoned your contact number and was told to put my comments in writing. I am obviously shocked both at this alleged illegal activity and the fact that the title appears to be of an offensive nature. I can confirm that i have no knowledge of this download being carried out at my home address. I have checked my computer and my sons computer for any reference to this file (using windows search function) and have found no trace. I have spoken to my two sons about downloads (They are 8 and 12) but obviously not about the nature of this file and to be honest they know even less than me. My oldest child has used i tunes and downloaded games from a site called friv.com but these claim to be free. Is this true? or will it also result in copyright issues ?

Others were offended at the titles they are accused of sharing:

I am no prude and can see what type of material something entitled Granny F— is. I am the father of 5 children, 3 of these under the age of 7, and to suggest i would have such material on a computer is what i find offensive. May i also add that i am very anti pornography, having been abused as a child by someone who would use porn films before abusing me .this is why i am totally anti porn.

If the situation has been tough for the accused, it's been difficult for Crossley as well. The e-mails show some vicious exchanges with his ex-wife and the strains of running his operation. Back in 1999, he suffered an "extended period of clinical depression" and then had a stroke in 2000. In the last year, he's been blasted by consumer groups, denounced in the House of Lords, called before regulators, had his private e-mails exposed to the world, and suffered bomb threats and abuse.

As he noted in one of his e-mails, "This business seems to have its share of complications."

The complications may continue. Though Crossley and GCB, which appears to have been started by former Crossley employees, have stopped sending out settlement letters and say they're getting out of the business, Crossley could still be on the hook for defendants' costs.

His scheme to profit from settlement letters brought some short-term rewards; the e-mails show him purchasing a Jeep Compass 2.4CVT, and a Bentley Arnage, and indicated that he "may buy a Ferrari F430 spider in a couple of months, but for cash." But it's also brought plenty of hassles, and may prove far less profitable when the venture is finally rolled up completely.