A point of order: > The plaintiff’s won a default judgement, because the defendants didn’t show > up in court. But they could not have shown up in court, because they were > only listed as “John Does” in the lawsuit.
It's actually a lawsuit against "Does 1-10 DBA Isreal.tv", so the defendants actually are on notice, they are the people behind israel.tv. This is a not-all-that-unusual method when a defendant goes out of their way to hide their individual identities. Basically this means everyone and anyone at israel.tv unless and until the actual individuals responsible show up. In order for a lawsuit to move forward _at all_, the plaintiff has to submit a certified "proof of service", which includes a sworn statement by the process server, proving that the defendant was actually served. In this case I'm guessing (and again, it's only a guess, but an educated guess) that the process server walked into the offices at israel.tv, at Cihannüma Mahallesi, Saray Cad, 34353 İstanbul-Turkey, and handed the summons to someone. A much more likely explanation for why they defaulted is that because the people behind israel.tv are not in the U.S. (i.e. in a country other than that in which the lawsuit was filed) they figured that they didn't have to bother responding. Anne -- Anne P. Mitchell, Attorney at Law CEO ISIPP SuretyMail Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law) Author: The Email Deliverability Handbook Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange Dean Emeritus, Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School Prof. Emeritus, Lincoln Law School Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop Counsel Emeritus: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS) (now the anti-spam arm of TrendMicro)
