Hotfile Tried to Dismiss Cyberlocker LawsuitAdded: Sunday, April 17th, 2011
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Ridiculous Criminal Trials
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
While the creative industry was watching the apparent emerging threat of cyberlocker storage websites, the industry observers understood that at some point the industry will pick a fight with one of the services. That unfortunate target was Florida-based Hotfile, which used to settle lawsuits earlier, but now is standing strong, filing a motion to dismiss.
The movie studious complained that Hotfile, a web-hosting service, and its owner are responsible for copyright infringement. In respond to this complaint, Hotfile filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit that was initiated by the MPAA. Spread on 22 pages, the motion claims that the plaintiffs’ factual allegations fell far short of the legal mark since the movie studios failed to state any claims for copyright violation upon which relief can be granted. Therefore, the allegations should be dismissed.
20th Century Fox, Disney, Columbia, Universal, and Warner all have apparently overlooked the largest cyberlockers on the market, like MegaUpload and RapidShare, and recently filed a case against Hotfile storage service. In other words, the Florida-based website became the reluctant guinea pig for testing the anti-cyberlocker legal strategies of the entertainment industry.
First of all, the MPAA pointed out that in less than 2 years, Hotfile has rapidly grown into one of the most trafficked websites throughout the globe, which could only be a result of the extensive digital theft that the service promoted. In fact, the MPAA accused the company of having a business model that relied on encouraging its customers to upload unauthorized copies of the movies and TV shows to its servers.
Perhaps, Hotfile was chosen as a target because it resides in the United States, but the most likely reason is that the service used to settle rather than fight in the past. However, the company changed its strategy and is not going to be backing down at the moment. At the very end of March it submitted a motion to dismiss, denying the claim of direct infringement and saying that it could only support a claim for secondary infringement, which is also deficient, as the plaintiffs don’t allege affirmative steps proving that the cyberlocker had the specific intent to promote violation.
Thanks to TorrentFreak for providing the source of the article
April 17th,2011Posted by:
Sunday, April 17th, 2011
|Wow ThAts cRazy DoNt TheY HaVe something bETTer TO do how do they know its infringement if they wasnt doing it themselves....|
|these studios cannnot do anything.....we pirates rocks...||
Most Popular Stories