News and analysis dedicated to the commercial litigation funding sector including regulatory issues, case developments, funding activities, and more.

Based in Sydney, Australia, Craig Allsopp is the Joint Head of Class Actions at Shine Lawyers. Craig has over two decades of experience in class actions and large-scale litigation in both the private and public sectors. His unwavering commitment to justice has left an indelible mark on Australia’s legal landscape, positioning him as a trailblazer in shareholder dispute resolutions. Craig’s distinguished career is studded with triumphs that have shaped legal precedent. In every case he sees through, Craig strives to obtain justice for thousands of people impacted by the misconduct of corporations, the big banks and other major financial service institutions, and Australian governments. In particular, Craig has worked on some of Australia’s highest profile shareholder and social justice class actions.

Craig’s dedication to legal excellence and social justice is demonstrated by the profound impact he has on the legal landscape. He has set a standard for advocacy and achieving substantive change in the pursuit of fairness and accountability, particularly in corporate and government sectors.

Company Name and Description: Shine Lawyers is an Australian law firm specialising in personal injury compensation and class actions. As one of Australia’s leading class actions firms, Shine Lawyers passionately fights to obtain justice for those who have been wronged and suffered loss at the hands of institutions or corporations.  

Company Website: https://www.shine.com.au/ 

Year Founded: 1976

Headquarters: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Area of Focus: Class Actions

Member Quote: Third-party litigation funding has significantly improved access to justice in Australian class actions allowing individuals to pursue representative claims against corporations and governments for various alleged misconducts.

Tenadio Corp, a consulting firm specializing in advising patent owners and inventors, announced it has completed an additional $60 million in financing for the Patent Capital Funding Program (“PCF”), a litigation finance program established by Tenadio’s founding principal, Michael Ciuffo. 

Waterford Capital, Inc., a Dallas, Texas based broker-dealer, was the sole placement agent for the transaction, which was privately placed with institutional investors. 

“The PCF Program is off to a great start for 2025. We are excited to have added new partners and participants in this round of funding and are very encouraged with recent events in patent litigation that will further strengthen our clients’ positions in defending the value in their intellectual property rights,” said Michael Ciuffo. 

“The Patent Capital Funding Program continues to be a reliable funding source for patent owners, having raised approximately $315 million in patent infringement litigation financing to date. We are so grateful for the collaboration of everyone involved, which is a key to the Program’s success, and we look forward to continuing its expansion,” said Dave Piotrowski, Managing Director of Waterford Capital. 

About Tenadio Corp

Tenadio Corp utilizes decades of experience in structured finance and litigation funding to develop optimal funding structures for patent holders and infringement litigation. Tenadio works with its advisors and partners to offer a full platform of patent litigation services, including patent valuation, monetization, funding options, and lead counsel selection. Tenadio provides a thorough evaluation of each patent infringement case, creating a structure that provides an attractive investment opportunity while simultaneously monetizing proceeds associated with future infringement cases. 

About Waterford Capital

Waterford Capital, Inc. is a leading arranger of litigation finance and other structured finance and asset securitization transactions. The firm arranges capital for clients in connection with patent infringement financing, asset-backed credit facilities, private placements of asset-backed securities, and whole loan sale programs. Waterford Capital is a registered broker-dealer and member FINRA/SIPC.

The International Legal Finance Association (ILFA), the only global association of commercial legal finance companies, announced that Juris Capital has joined their association, adding to their rapidly growing membership base. 

Juris Capital is committed to delivering innovation solutions for financial stability for commercial litigation and arbitration along with investments in law firms through creative billing arrangements. Juris Capital’s team has over twenty years of experience investing in commercial litigation, all of their principals are licensed attorneys or certified public accountants. 

“Juris is excited to join ILFA to provide perspective from its over 15 years of operation,” said David Desser, Juris Managing Director. 

“We believe the industry faces an inflection point, where the choice of policies will affect outcomes for businesses, consumers, and funders, and we will support ILFA’s effort to secure sound policies in the United States and abroad.” said Dane Lund, Juris Managing Director. 

Rupert Cunningham, Global Director of Growth and Membership Engagement at ILFA, commented on Juris Capital joining ILFA, saying “I’m delighted to welcome Juris Capital to ILFA’s growing ranks. Juris’ team bring with them a great deal of experience in litigation finance and we at ILFA look forward to working with David and Dane, whose expertise will be invaluable in our efforts to support and represent the legal finance sector globally.”

About the International Legal Finance Association  

The International Legal Finance Association (ILFA) represents the global commercial legal finance community, and its mission is to engage, educate and influence legislative, regulatory and judicial landscapes as the voice of the commercial legal finance industry. It is the only global association of commercial legal finance companies and is an independent, non-profit trade association promoting the highest standards of operation and service for the commercial legal finance sector. ILFA has local chapter representation around the world. 

For more information, visit www.ilfa.com and find us on LinkedIn and X @ILFA_Official.

Stephen is a seasoned litigation and contingent risk insurance broker and former practicing complex commercial litigator who joined WTW in February 2025 as Head of Litigation and Contingent Risk Insurance.  In his role, Stephen evaluates litigation-related risks and structures bespoke litigation and contingent risk insurance policies for litigation finance, hedge fund, private equity, law firm, and corporate clients. 

Prior to joining WTW, Stephen was a Managing Director and Senior Lawyer in Aon’s Litigation Risk Group.  Stephen joined Aon in 2019, and was the first insurance industry professional dedicated solely to the litigation and contingent risk insurance market, leading the Litigation Risk Group’s origination and business development work, in-house legal diligence, efforts to advocate for coverage with underwriters, and negotiation and structuring of insurance policies.  During his time at Aon, Stephen was a three-time Risk and Insurance Magazine “Power Broker” (2022, 2023, 2024); spearheaded the development of judgment preservation insurance and insurance-backed judgment monetization as well as the synergy of litigation and contingent risk insurance with litigation finance; and was responsible for placing billions of dollars in total coverage limits – including the largest ever litigation and contingent risk insurance policy, and several policies that each provided over $500 million in coverage limits – and delivering hundreds of millions of dollars in premium to insurers.  Stephen additionally provided consulting and broking services on litigation-driven, insurance capital-based investment opportunities and sales of litigation claims, insurance claims, and subrogation rights as part of the Aon Special Opportunities Group.

Prior to joining the insurance industry, Stephen was a complex commercial litigator in the New York City office of Boies, Schiller & Flexner from 2011 to 2019.  While at BSF, Stephen amassed significant trial, appellate, and arbitration experience representing both plaintiffs and defendants in the U.S. and abroad across a wide array of practice areas, including securities, antitrust, constitutional, insurance, first amendment, employment, government contracting, and criminal law, as well as in multidistrict and class action litigation.  Stephen’s clients included banks and other major financial institutions, private equity firms, technology companies, foreign sovereigns, professional sports teams, television networks, insurance companies, corporate executives, and other high-net-worth individuals.  

Stephen earned his J.D. from the New York University School of Law in 2010, and is a member of the New York State Bar.  He also clerked for the Honorable Tanya S. Chutkan in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Company Name and Description:  Willis Towers Watson

Company Website: https://www.wtwco.com/en-us

Headquarters:  Stephen is based in New York

Area of Focus:  Litigation and contingent risk insurance for litigation finance, hedge fund, private equity, law firm, and corporate clients

Member Quote:  “I have been working with litigation finance firms to insure their litigation-related investments since I first entered the insurance industry in 2019, and I view litigation finance and funder-backed plaintiff-side litigation as the most important growth areas for the litigation and contingent risk insurance market, as well as the areas where coverage can be most value additive for clients. 

I have also been bringing litigation finance firms into insurance transactions as financing counterparties since I first devised the concept of insurance-backed monetization for judgment preservation insurance clients back in 2020, which concept has since expanded to the point where litigation finance capital has become inexorably intertwined with all forms of plaintiff-side insurance coverage.  

As the market for this insurance pivots away from single-case risks and towards portfolio-based policies for litigation finance firms and the law firms that they fund, litigation finance clients can trust that WTW will be at the forefront of innovating new coverage structures and concepts to address their unique risk management needs and ambitious financial goals, will deliver best-in-class client service utilizing our incomparably strong and longstanding relationships with underwriters, and will be a vocal champion of litigation finance both within and outside of the insurance industry.”

PIB Group Ltd (‘PIB’ or ‘the Group’), the specialist insurance intermediary group, has acquired market-leading litigation insurance provider Litica. 

Managing General Agent (MGA) Litica specialises in a range of insurance-backed solutions for private and corporate clients involved in litigation or arbitration.

Litica was founded in London in 2019 by co-founding directors Stephen Bolster and Steve Ruffle. It has since expanded its operations to Australia, the United States and Germany. The company has a large panel of insurer backers and is a Lloyd’s coverholder. This access to significant insurance capacity enables them to underwrite a range of complex and high value litigation types. 

Charles Burgess, CEO of Underwriting and Schemes at PIB Group, said: “Having Litica join PIB Group marks an exciting milestone, enabling our MGA division to enter the next phase of growth. Liticia’s operations in Australia and the United States provide our MGA business with a strong foothold in these markets, bringing a wealth of opportunity to the wider Group. We’re excited to have Stephen, Steve and their team join us – their experience will be invaluable.”

Stephen Bolster, co-founding director at Litica, said: “At Litica we have spent the last six years establishing ourselves as the UK’s leading provider of specialist litigation insurance, and we are beginning to replicate that success across international markets. Joining an entrepreneurial and ambitious Group provides us with the capabilities we need to continue growing, while still providing our clients with the professional and diligent services we are known for.”

Steve Ruffle, co-founding director at Litica, said: “Being part of an ambitious, bold and fast-paced international Group will ensure we are positioned well to make the most of the opportunities the market continues to present. We are looking forward to leveraging PIB Group’s wide range of products, solutions and expertise in insurance and risk management.”

ILFA and the Association of Litigation Funders of England and Wales have submitted a joint response to the Civil Justice Council’s consultation on litigation funding.

Legal experts, representative bodies and law firms have also made their submissions public. While there are – of course – a range of views about the sector and possible reforms, there are two common threads: 

• Firstly, all contributors are in unanimous agreement that litigation funding is a critical tool in the UK for enabling access to justice, from Sir Alan Bates and the subpostmasters in the Post Office scandal to equal pay for supermarket workers.
• Secondly, the uncertainty facing the sector because of the 2023 PACCAR judgment is jeapordising that access to justice and must be urgently reversed. In their submission to the CJC, leading Oxford University civil justice academics said “there is a compelling and urgent need to reverse the effects”. The City of London Law Society said “this is an ongoing unsatisfactory state of affairs”. The Class Representatives Network said the current state of uncertainty is “untenable”. The Forum of Complex Injury Solicitors wants to “reinstate the position of prePACCAR”. It goes on. 

ILFA and ALF joint response 

ILFA and ALF’s submission is based on the views of its members who are among the largest and most experienced funders in England and Wales. 

In summary, the views of ILFA and ALF are as follows: 

1. Litigation funding plays a critical role in enabling access to justice. For many claimants, including consumers and SMEs, it provides the only route to redress. For others, litigation funding allows businesses to use their capital to grow their core business and create jobs instead of tying up budgets for litigation costs.
2. Litigation funding has worked well in England and Wales. As well as providing access to justice, litigation funding promotes equality of arms between parties. Funding also brings other benefits such as promoting the public interest through exposing corporate wrongdoing, driving good litigation behaviour and supporting the development of English jurisprudence. Commonly stated concerns about litigation funding supporting frivolous or vexatious claims are not supported by evidence; in fact, the evidence is that funders are highly selective in the cases they fund, providing a reality check which benefits parties beyond the funded client and helping direct resources towards meritorious claims.
3. As well as enabling access to justice, litigation funding has developed into a crucial pillar supporting the UK’s leading global role as a legal and financial centre. To ensure this continues, urgent legislation is needed to address the uncertainty caused by the PACCAR judgment.
4. In the absence of evidence of harm that needs to be addressed and given the detriment that would be caused by additional regulatory burdens, the current self-regulatory approach strikes the right balance. It will continue to evolve by, for example, potential updates to the ALF Code of Conduct in consultation with the CJC.
5. Funders’ returns should not be capped. The existing, competitive funding market is best placed to assess and price the many risks involved and the practical effect of an (inflexible) cap would be to make fewer meritorious cases fundable and have a negative effect on access to justice.
6. Litigation funding helps to control costs (via funder scrutiny and oversight of budgets) but costs are subject to many factors including the defendant’s conduct of the case. Arbitrators have discretion to order that the cost of litigation funding should be recoverable as a cost in proceedings. The courts should have the same discretion.
7. Recoverability of adverse costs and security for costs applications increase the costs of litigation, costs that are ultimately borne by successful claimants. These costs restrict access to justice and diminish claimants’ net recovery. Permitting flexibility in how adverse cost risk is addressed is beneficial for access to justice.
8. Funders have less control over proceedings than other third parties that provide economic support for litigation. Concerns relating to control by litigation funders are unfounded.
9. Beyond representative proceedings in the CAT, there is no need to incur the cost, delay and uncertainty of having the court approve settlements of funded proceedings.
10. Claimants in funded cases are always represented by lawyers, who owe duties to their client alone, which provides protection for claimants when entering a litigation funding arrangement and throughout their litigation. Measures to address conflicts are adequately reflected in best practices and professional regulation.

About the International Legal Finance Association

The International Legal Finance Association (ILFA) represents the global commercial legal finance community, and its mission is to engage, educate and influence legislative, regulatory and judicial landscapes as the voice of the commercial legal finance industry. It is the only global association of commercial legal finance companies and is an independent, non-profit trade association promoting the highest standards of operation and service for the commercial legal finance sector. ILFA has local chapter representation around the world. 

For more information, visit www.ilfa.com and find us on LinkedIn and X @ILFA_Official.

The following article was contributed by Kirstine Rogers, Legal Director at Certum Group, and Molly Pease, Managing Director at Curiam Capital.

Both are also on the steering committee for Women of Litigation Finance (WOLF). WOLF is an organization intended to give women in and around the litigation finance field a space for support, mentorship and connections. WOLF holds quarterly zoom meetings focused on specific relevant topics and hosts various networking events throughout the year.  Please find out more through our LinkedIn page or by contacting any member of the steering committee. WOLF welcomes the support and participation of all industry members. 

—

As our country continues to debate the pros and cons of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in the government and private sectors, the litigation finance industry would be well served by remembering that diverse teams make companies better.  Indeed, several studies have explored the link between diversity initiatives and increased profitability in organizations and found that a more diverse workforce can positively impact business performance, innovation, and profitability.

There are many reasons for this.  First, representation matters.  Whether it is getting a phone call for a potential new investment opportunity from a female general counsel who wants to see diversity in the team she might be working with or being able to hire top talent who want to work with a diverse team, better opportunities present themselves to litigation finance market participants when those firms present a diverse and capable team.  Second, a diverse team allows for more diverse networking opportunities, which encourages investment opportunities from a wide variety of sources.  And finally, and potentially most importantly, diversity of backgrounds, skills, and expertise allows for a risk assessment in underwriting investment opportunities that is less likely to miss potential risks or pitfalls that a more narrow-minded team might not see.  Better underwriting decisions result in better investments, which results in more revenue for the company.

Diversity need not be a mandate for it to be an intentional and profitable choice.

“If you build it, they will come.” 

Does your company reflect the world of your counterparty or their counsel?  

Research has shown that consumers are more likely to buy from or engage with businesses that appear to understand their specific needs, often through shared demographic traits like race, gender, or age.  Businesses that reflect their target consumers’ characteristics and values are more likely to foster trust and client loyalty.   The same is true in commercial transactions with counterparties and their counsel.  In entering into a funding agreement, you are forming a potentially long-term partnership.  Communication and trust are essential to the success of that relationship.  You only maximize the likelihood of that success with the diversity of the decision makers on your team.   

Companies with inclusive environments are also more likely to attract top talent and retain employees.  Why wouldn’t a firm cast the widest net possible?

“Nobody puts baby in a corner.” 

Having a diverse workforce also increases opportunities for connection and visibility in the market.  It provides a vehicle for commonality – a shared experience, history, or perspective.  This is because similar backgrounds make it easier to communicate, share common goals, and find mutual interests, which in turn can lead to individual career opportunities and company-wide growth.

Diversity-based industry groups like the Women of Litigation Finance (WOLF) facilitate interaction between market peers, provide leadership and speaking opportunities, and lead to collaboration between companies seeking to work together.  Bar associations also frequently have smaller diversity-based committees that provide a smaller community from which to network and form connections.  Bigger fish. Smaller pond.  Stronger bond.  And these genuine connections formed on shared experiences can lead to exponential networking growth.  A familiar face at one industry event only leads to more familiar faces at the next one.  

This is true for thought leadership too.  If every member of a panel of speakers looks the same and does not reflect the different faces in the audience, there are people in that audience your panel is not reaching.  If every article is written from the same perspective, there are readers who are not listening.  

“You’re gonna need a bigger boat.” 

At its core, the litigation finance industry assesses risk.  The better a firm can do that – whether it is a funder, a broker, or an insurer – the more profitable it will be.  Risk assessment involves seeing things that others might miss and making sure no stone gets left unturned.  

There are many components of a due diligence risk assessment, including reviewing the strength of the legal merits of the claims, assessing the credibility and testifying potential of key witnesses, and predicting what arguments or defenses will be presented by opposing counsel.  A diligence team with diverse backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives will be better at identifying risks and assessing the value of potential claims.  For example, a funder will often speak extensively with key witnesses to assess how they would present testimony at trial and whether a jury would find that testimony credible and persuasive.  If a trial team were conducting a mock jury to test these points, it would assemble a diverse panel of men and women from different ages and backgrounds to get various views on the testimony.  Similarly, a funder trying to make its own internal assessment will be better served by a diverse team with a variety of perspectives.  If everyone in the room has the same basic background, characteristics, and experiences, they are likely to see things similarly and thus miss key factors that could be important in determining the impact of the testimony.  And this is only one aspect of a risk assessment.  Each step of the diligence and risk assessment process would benefit from analysis by a diverse team.  The biggest concern in the litigation finance industry is that a funder, broker, or insurer misses a significant risk in their assessment of a legal asset and finds themselves funding an investment that has a low chance of success in hindsight.  A diverse team will protect against this outcome and therefore drive revenue for industry participants.

“You talkin’ to me?” 

At the end of the day, the value of meaningfully implemented diversity initiatives is clear.  Having the benefit of differing experiences and perspectives makes companies better.  And, as to litigation finance in particular, diversity without question strengthens the return on investments. 

But just having a diverse workforce does not necessarily result in a better company or improved profitability.  The company needs to foster an inclusive environment where diverse perspectives are valued and integrated into decision-making processes and where those selected as thought leaders demonstrate how diversity is implemented, prioritized, and integrated into company culture.

In honor of International Women’s Day, make this a call to action – what can you do at your company to ensure you have the broadest perspectives represented?  Ask yourself, does the panel you are sponsoring completely reflect your target client base?  Does your leadership team include those with different perspectives?  Does your company provide women with networking and mentoring opportunities? 

After all, diversity presents an opportunity for someone at your company to collaborate with other market participants to write an article just like this.  

About the authors:

Molly Pease is Managing Director and Chief Compliance Officer at Curiam Capital, and Kirstine Rogers is Legal Director at Certum Group. They both serve on the Steering Committee for WOLF, the Women of Litigation Finance.  They can be reached at molly.pease@curiam.com and krogers@certumgroup.com. 

Caroline Taylor is a Founding Partner of Ignitis, an early-stage litigation funder focused on developing cases to assess viability and prepare them for full litigation. With over a decade of litigation experience, Caroline brings a unique blend of funding expertise and strategic legal insight, leveraging an extensive professional network to support cases from inception to resolution. Ignitis partners with claimants, foundations, corporate clients, lawyers, experts, funders, and other legal professionals to ensure that each case has what it needs to maximize its chance of success.

Before founding Ignitis, Caroline was a partner at a leading international collective redress firm. She played a key role in expanding the firm’s European operations, including opening offices across several countries, assembling and leading teams, and driving case development and management. Her work in securing litigation funding helped support the development of over 30 cases across Europe and the UK. Caroline’s ability to seamlessly integrate operations between U.S. and European offices proved instrumental in advancing initiatives on both sides of the Atlantic. Her deep understanding of collective redress procedures in multiple European jurisdictions, combined with her experience taking cases from concept to resolution, makes her well-suited for her role at Ignitis.

During her time in private practice, Caroline specialized in class actions, complex litigation, and personal injury cases, gaining firsthand experience of the impact corporate misconduct can have on individuals. This exposure sharpened her litigation skills and solidified her commitment to justice. Caroline also served in several leadership roles, including as a Board Member of the American Association for Justice, Chair of its Railroad Section, and as a Board and Executive Committee Member of the Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association. She has received numerous accolades, including recognition by The National Trial Lawyers, Best Lawyers in America, and Super Lawyers. Caroline is a frequent speaker at international legal conferences.

She is admitted to practice in Tennessee, Florida, and Kentucky state courts, as well as in numerous federal and appellate courts in the United States and England and Wales.

Company Name and Description: Ignitis AG is an early-stage funding company. Ignitis was founded to solve a critical challenge: parties often need initial capital to develop the case into something viable to attract larger litigation funders. Essentially, to secure funding, one must first invest capital. Drawing on decades of experience in litigation and institutional investment, we are uniquely positioned to provide the capital and expertise needed to kickstart cases and drive them toward resolution. We focus solely on early-stage funding, ensuring that quality cases get the financing they need to be successful while increasing access to justice.

Company Website: www.ignitisag.com

Year Founded: 2024

Headquarters: Zug, Switzerland

Area of Focus: We focus specifically on initial case development and early-stage funding. We put our money in at initial, risky stages, to develop the case and prepare it for full funding and filing. We not only inject capital, but we also provide expertise and advice along the way to ensure that the case has the greatest opportunity for success.

Member Quote: “Too many meritorious cases never make it to court, not because they lack merit, but because the injured parties lack the financial resources or the know-how to move forward. At Ignitis, we are committed to improving access to justice by investing in cases that other funders might overlook and offering the expertise needed for thorough case development—ensuring more individuals have their day in court.”

Pretium, a specialized investment firm with more than $57 billion in assets under management, has closed its inaugural Legal Opportunities Fund, securing approximately $500 million in equity capital commitments from a group of new and existing investors.

The Fund will provide liquidity to plaintiffs, entitlement holders and law firms pursuing a broad range of corporate claims, including patent infringement, anti-trust, and general commercial and contract litigation. For investors, the Fund offers the potential for attractive risk-adjusted returns that are minimally correlated to traditional markets.

“The demand for this Fund underscores not only the evergreen opportunities in legal finance, but the strength of Pretium’s investment approach,” said Don Mullen, Founder and CEO of Pretium. “We are specialists in unlocking value in complex investments with high barriers to entry. Having developed that expertise through our work in residential real estate, we are applying it to legal opportunities, which we believe will create significant benefits for our investors.”

Matthew Cantor, Senior Managing Director leading Pretium’s Legal Opportunities strategy, added, “Intellectual property is the capital driving the growth of the digital economy and the development of legal finance. By providing bespoke capital solutions to fund the monetization of legal entitlements, we’re supporting law firms, corporations, and other sophisticated parties to help more efficiently and effectively manage their legal risks.”

Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP served as legal counsel to the Pretium Legal Opportunities Fund.

About PretiumPretium is a specialized investment firm focused on U.S. residential real estate, residential credit, and corporate credit. Pretium was founded in 2012 to capitalize on investment and lending opportunities arising as a result of structural changes, disruptions, and inefficiencies within the economy. Pretium has built an integrated analytical and operational ecosystem within the U.S. housing, residential credit, and corporate credit markets, and believes that its insight and experience within these markets create a strategic advantage over other investment managers. Pretium’s platform has more than $57 billion of assets, comprising real estate investments across nearly 90 markets in the U.S., and employs approximately 7,000 people across 50 offices, including its New York headquarters, Miami, London, Seoul, and Sydney. Please visit www.pretium.com for additional information.

Rightscorp, Inc., a leader in digital copyright enforcement and data intelligence, is pleased to provide a comprehensive corporate update following its successful shareholder meeting. This update outlines the company’s ongoing legal achievements, strategic growth initiatives, and the preview of its transformative Rightscan Data Aggregator platform.

Commitment to Shareholders

Rightscorp extends its sincere appreciation to all shareholders who participated in the recent shareholder meeting and exercised their voting rights on proxy materials. We are pleased to announce that all resolutions were approved, demonstrating strong investor confidence in the company’s strategic direction. This support underscores a shared commitment to expanding Rightscorp’s technological and legal capabilities to maximize long-term valuation.

Establishing Legal Precedent: Rightscorp’s Pivotal Role in Copyright Enforcement

Rightscorp has consistently played a defining role in shaping legal precedent in copyright enforcement, delivering tangible results for rights holders. Over the years, the company has been instrumental in major litigation efforts that have established significant legal standards in the fight against digital piracy. Key legal milestones include:

• BMG Rights Management v. Cox Communications (2015) – A landmark case reaffirming ISPs’ obligations under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) resulted in a $25 million jury award and $8.3 million in attorney’s fees for copyright holders, ultimately settling for an undisclosed amount. This set a pivotal precedent regarding the responsibilities of ISPs in mitigating piracy on their networks.
• UMG Recordings, Inc. et al. v. Grande Communications Networks, LLC (2022) – A federal jury found Grande Communications liable for willful contributory copyright infringement, initially awarding $46.7 million in damages. The ruling reaffirmed that ISPs cannot claim safe harbor protection while failing to address widespread copyright violations on their networks.
• BMG Rights Management v. Altice USA, Inc. (2022-2024) – A rapid and decisive legal action against Altice USA, one of the largest ISPs in the U.S. The case, built on overwhelming evidence provided by Rightscorp, resulted in a confidential settlement in record time, reinforcing the company’s effectiveness in securing enforcement outcomes.

These cases underscore Rightscorp’s ability to leverage sophisticated copyright data intelligence to support rights holders in enforcing their intellectual property rights through decisive legal action.

Legal Victory in American Films v. Rightscorp, Inc.

Rightscorp is pleased to report a significant legal victory in the case of American Films, LLC v. Rightscorp, Inc. The case, which stemmed from meritless claims against Rightscorp, was ultimately dismissed with prejudice, affirming the company’s legal standing. Furthermore, the court ruled in favor of Rightscorp’s entitlement to recover attorneys’ fees and litigation costs. This outcome reflects the company’s steadfast commitment to defending itself against unfounded legal challenges and reinforces the legitimacy of its operations.

Expanding Legal Initiatives Through Strategic Litigation Partnerships

To further strengthen its enforcement capabilities, Rightscorp is actively engaging with industry-leading litigation funders to scale its legal initiatives. These strategic partnerships will enable the company to pursue larger and more impactful copyright enforcement actions with increased efficiency. Additionally, Rightscorp’s long-standing legal counsel-instrumental in previous landmark copyright litigation-remains actively involved and highly optimistic about the evolving legal landscape. With expanded funding and legal expertise, Rightscorp is positioned to drive enforcement actions on a scale never seen before, benefiting copyright owners across the industry.

Rightscan Data Aggregator: A Paradigm Shift in Copyright Intelligence (Coming Q2-Q3 2025)

Rightscorp is proud to introduce Rightscan, a cutting-edge AI-powered platform designed to transform the landscape of copyright enforcement and data monetization. Unlike conventional enforcement tools that rely on self-reported infringement data, Rightscan autonomously aggregates and analyzes vast datasets, offering unparalleled insight into copyright compliance, piracy trends, and enforcement opportunities.

To learn more about Rightscan and its capabilities, visit www.rightscan.co

Key Capabilities of Rightscan:

• DMCA Compliance Monitoring – AI-driven tracking of ISP compliance, ensuring persistent enforcement regardless of corporate restructuring or name changes.
• Comprehensive Copyright Registration Intelligence – Analyzes official copyright filings to identify works and highlight acquisition opportunities for investors.
• Piracy Leakage Analysis – Provides API-driven insights to royalty collection firms and content owners, quantifying lost revenue linked to digital piracy.
• Advanced Data Monetization – Leverages proprietary data analytics to provide actionable intelligence for private equity firms, digital rights managers, and ad-tech platforms.
• IP-Based Audience Insights – Uses torrent-related data to offer alternative audience targeting solutions, bridging the gap between piracy monitoring and digital marketing optimization.

Continued Market Demand for Rightscorp’s Legal Copyright Enforcement Platform

While Rightscan marks a significant leap in copyright intelligence, Rightscorp’s legal enforcement platform remains integral to the company’s core operations. The demand for traditional copyright enforcement remains strong among major record labels, private equity firms, and other entities that own extensive copyright portfolios.

The growing availability of litigation funding, combined with renewed interest from existing and prospective clients, is driving expansion discussions. The company is actively working with litigation funders, legal experts, and copyright owners to scale enforcement initiatives faster and more effectively than ever before.

Looking Forward: A Future Defined by Innovation and Enforcement

As Rightscorp continues to lead in copyright enforcement and data intelligence, our focus remains on technological advancement, strategic industry partnerships, and further legal precedents. By harnessing AI-driven copyright analytics, securing litigation funding, and reinforcing its market leadership, Rightscorp is setting the stage for sustained growth and enhanced value for its shareholders.

About

Rightscorp (OTC PINK:RIHT) monetizes copyrighted Intellectual Property (IP). The Company’s patent pending digital loss prevention technology focuses on the infringement of digital content such as music, movies, software, and games and ensures that owners and creators are rightfully paid for their IP. Rightscorp implements existing laws to solve copyright infringements by collecting payments from illegal file sharing activities via notifications sent through Internet Service Providers (ISPs). The Company’s technology identifies copyright infringers, who are offered a reasonable settlement option when compared to the legal liability defined in the Digital Millennium Copyrights Act (DMCA). Based on the fact that 24% of all internet traffic is used to distribute copyrighted content without permission, Rightscorp is pursuing an estimated $2.3 billion opportunity and has monetized major media titles through relationships with industry leaders.

Safe Harbor Statement

This shareholder update contains information that constitutes forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from any future results described within the forward-looking statements. Risk factors that could contribute to such differences include those matters more fully disclosed in the Company’s reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The forward-looking information provided herein represents the Company’s estimates as of the date of the shareholder update, and subsequent events and developments may cause the Company’s estimates to change. The Company specifically disclaims any obligation to update the forward-looking information in the future. Therefore, this forward-looking information should not be relied upon as representing the Company’s estimates of its future financial performance as of any date subsequent to the date of this shareholder update.

CONTACT:

Markus Rainak
855-520-7448
Support@rightscorp.com

Kishore Jaichandani is a founder and Managing Director of CAVEAT CAPITAL and an
expert in litigation funding and related advisory services globally. He has a unique
combination of financial and, legal acumen with having Bachelor of Law., Company
Secretary, MBA (Finance) and CIMA qualifications and have rich professional experience
working on these areas for more than 25 years.

He assists law firms, corporates, and individuals globally in obtaining non-recourse
financing for commercial litigation and arbitration cases. He is committed to creating value
for lawyers and, their clients to have access to the information and expertise they need
to negotiate fair funding agreements in the event of litigation in the competitive legal
market. His expertise includes developing financial solutions to help law firms and big
corporations to mitigate risk, and achieve their growth strategies, including using litigation
portfolios as collateral for off-balance sheet working capital, and monetizing litigation and
judgments.

Company Name and Description: CAVEAT CAPITAL arranges to provide litigation finance solutions
that address clients’ unique challenges. We manage entire litigation funding process, utilize our capital
sources and negotiate with various stakeholders for our clients. We arrange to meet
clients’ litigation costs to provide a better solution for P&L, working capital support, and
budgets to optimize recovery efforts to transform the legal cost from cost center to value
generator.

CAVEAT CAPITAL assesses the feasibility and options for obtaining legal finance /
litigation or arbitration funding. We are highly skilled and experienced in providing clients
with honest and reliable assessments of the funding opportunities of each case.

Company Website: www.caveat-capital.com

Year Founded:  2022

Headquarters:  Dubai, UAE

Area of Focus: Litigation Funding / Legal Finance / Third Party Funding 

Member Quote: “Transform your legal costs into Value Generation”

As LFJ reported last week, momentum continues to build behind state-level legislative proposals that seek to impose new rules governing the use of third-party litigation funding in the U.S. 

Reporting by the AP covers a new development in the Georgia state legislature, where the Senate has unanimously passed the second part of Gov. Brian Kemp’s legislative package aimed at tort reform and third-party litigation funding. Senate Bill 69, which passed the Senate last Thursday with 52 Yea votes, amends state law to include new provisions governing the involvement of litigation funders.

SB 69 requires third-party funders register with Georgia’s Department of Banking and Finance, as well as prohibiting any foreign individuals or organisation from funding litigation in the state. The bill also sets out disclosure requirements for cases where a litigation funding agreement is present and puts in place restrictions on a funder’s ability to control the litigation process.

Senate President Pro Tem John Kennedy, a sponsor of the bill, said that SB 69  “combats the growing foreign influence” in Georgia lawsuits, and argued that the new rules contained within the bill act as a “consumer protection measure”. The Georgia Trial Lawyers Association, which opposes these attempts at reform, stated that there is “still work to be done to ensure SB 69 fairly addresses its intended purpose”. 

SB 69 will now join SB 68, the part of Gov. Kemp’s package that primarily deals with tort reform, to be debated in the House and scrutinised by a bi-partisan subcommittee convened by House Rules Committee Chairman Butch Parrish. 

The full text and status of Senate Bill 69 can be accessed on the Georgia General Assembly website.

On Thursday, February 27th, LFJ hosted a virtual town hall on AI and legal technology. The panel discussion featured Erik Bomans (EB), CEO of Deminor Recovery Services, Stewart Ackerly (SA), Director at Statera Capital, David Harper (DH), co-founder and CEO of Legal Intelligence, and Patrick Ip (PI), co-founder of Theo AI. The panel was hosted by Ted Farrell, founder of Litigation Funding Advisers.

Below are some key takeaways from the discussion:

Everyone reads about AI every day and how it’s disrupting this industry, being used here and being used there. So what I wanted to ask you all to talk about what is the use case for AI, specific to the litigation finance business?

PI: There are a couple of core use cases on our end that we hear folks use it for. One is a complementary approach to underwriting. So initial gut take as to what are potentially the case killers. So should I actually invest time in human underwriting to look at this case?

The second use case is a last check. So before we’re actually going into fund, obviously cases are fluid. They’re ever-evolving. They’re changing. So between the first pass and the last check, has anything changed that would stop us from actually doing the funding? And then the third more novel approach that we’ve gotten a lot of feedback

There are 270,000 new lawsuits filed a day. Generally speaking, in order to understand if this lawsuit has any merit, you have to read through all the cases. It’s very time consuming to do. Directionally, as an application, as an AI application, We can comb through all those documents. We can read all those emails. We can look through social and digest public information to say, hey, these are the cases that actually are most relevant to your fund. Instead of looking through 50 or 100 of these, these are the top 10 most relevant ones. And we send those to clients on a weekly basis. Interesting.

I don’t want you to give up your proprietary special sauce, but how are you all trying to leverage these tools to aid you and deliver the kind of returns that LPs want to see?

SA: We can make the most effective use of AI or other technologies – whether it’s at the very top of the funnel and what’s coming into the funnel, or whether it’s deeper down into the funnel of a case that we like – is that we try to find a way to leverage AI to complement our underwriting. We think about it a lot on the origination side just making us more efficient, letting us be able to sift through a larger number of cases more quickly and as effectively as if we had bodies to look through them all, but also to help us just find more cases that may be a potential fit.

In terms of kind of the data sources that you rely on. I think a question we always think about, especially for kind of early stage cases is, is there enough data available? For example, if there’s just a complaint on file, is that going to give you enough for AI to give you a meaningful result?

I think most of the people on this call would tell you duration is in a lot of ways the biggest risk that funders take. So what specific pieces of these cases is AI helping you drill down into, and how are you harnessing the leverage you can access with these tools?

DH: We, 18 months ago or so, in the beginning of our journey on this use case in law, were asked by a very, very big and very well respected personal injury business in the UK to help them make sense of 37,000 client files that they’d settled with insurers on non-fault motor accident.

And we ran some modeling. We created some data scientist assets, which were AI assets. And their view was, if we had more resources, we would do more of the following things. But we’re limited by the amount of people we’ve got and the amount we get per file to spend on delivering that file. So we developed some AI assets to investigate the nearly 40,000 cases, what the insurers across different jurisdictions and different circumstances settled on.

And we, in partnership with them, improved their settlement value by 8%. The impact that had on their EBITDA, etc. That’s on a firm level, right? That’s on a user case where a firm is actually using AI to perform a science task on their data to give them better predictive analysis. Because lawyers were erring on the side of caution. they would go on a lowball offer because of the impact of getting that wrong if it went to court after settlement. So I think for us, our conversations with financiers and law firms, alignment is key, right? So a funder wants to protect their capital and time – the longer things take, the longer your capital’s out, the potential lower returns.

AI can offer a lot of solutions for very specific problems and can be very useful and can reduce the cost of analyzing these cases, but predictive outcome analysis requires a lot of data. And so the problem is, where do you get the data from and how good is the data? How unstructured or structured are the data sets?

I think getting access to the data is one issue. The other one is the quality of the data, of course, that you put into the machine. If you put bad data in a machine, you might get some correlations, but what’s the relevance, right? And that’s the problem that we are facing.

So many cases are settled, you don’t know the outcome. And that’s why you still need the human component. We need doctors to train computers to analyze medical images. We need lawyers and people with litigation experience who can tell a computer whether this is a good case, whether this is a good settlement or a bad settlement. And in the end, if you don’t know it because it’s confidential, someone has to make a call on that. I’m afraid that’s what we have to do, right? Even one litigation fund or several litigation funders are not going to have enough data with settlements on the same type of claim to build a predictive analytical model on it.

And so you need to get massive amounts of data where some human elements, some coding is still going to be required, manual coding. And I think that’s a process that we’re going to have to go through.

You can view the full panel discussion here.