“John Doe” Lawsuits Dismissed AgainAdded: Monday, May 30th, 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
The judges keep insisting that the cases against many John Does should be dismissed because the IP addresses are not people.
In the beginning of the month, Illinois lawyer John Steele filed a lawsuit against a long list of “John Doe” file-sharers on behalf of one of the New York-based porn movie studios. Like many other mass file-sharing lawsuits of this nature, this one started with a long list of IP addresses collected by movie studios and record companies. In case the lawsuit is approved for the next step, the court would demand broadband providers to disclose the personal information of all IP address owners alleged of downloading the unauthorized files.
However, just 2 days after the lawyer had submitted the lawsuit, the case was dismissed by Judge Milton Shadur who claimed that he wanted see no more “John Doe” cases in his court. He recommended the plaintiffs to rather sue identifiable defendants instead of a passel of “Does”. Meanwhile, previous court ruling in Illinois already stated that IP addressed didn’t equal to people, because the infringers might be someone in the subscriber’s household, including neighbors, visitors, and even strangers parked outside.
So, in this case the plaintiffs could not move forward and obtain personal data from Internet service providers, because they failed to provide evidence that certain people committed the crime in the state of Illinois. However, the judge said that the plaintiffs were free to advance their copyright violation claims against already identified defendants they know for sure the court had jurisdiction over.
Actually, this case wasn’t the first lawsuit filed by Steele that was dismissed by Judge Shadur. Earlier, the lawyer submitted a lawsuit on behalf of another porn producer against 300 unidentified individuals accused of illegal sharing of the adult movie. What is interesting in this story is that the lawsuit was dismissed twice: the first time because the lawyer failed to serve all the accused individuals within the mandatory 4 months, blaming the broadband providers for being too slow. The second time, the case was dismissed after the judge began receiving “notions to quash” from defendants residing in other states.
The lawsuits against a long list of unidentified file-sharers are being dismissed worldwide, and the reason for that may be the case with an accused individual who was falsely accused of downloading child porno, while the responsible one for the crime appeared to be his neighbor.
May 30th,2011Posted by:
Monday, May 30th, 2011
|posted by (2011-05-30 15:16:12)|
|Such a wasted of times ! go on keep sue me|
|I say let them keep shooting themselves in the foot. All these precedent cases against them is only helping Defendant I.P. addresses in getting cases thrown out of court. Same goes for the Hurt Locker 24,000 plus Doe suits as well.|
|HaHa, Using John Doe Names ftw|
|Here is the major problem as to why these ISP's do not want to give out the info, because they really cannot give it out accurately. They share IP addresses between subscribers! IP addresses ARE NOT special to one subscriber! 1 IP can be shared between 2 subscribers. I am waiting for this defense to be brought up. Not only that but proxies can be set up with any IP address, thus the wrong person can be blamed for that alone!|
|Let me also point out that ISP's would be in violation of the law if they actually monitored the content that any IP address was uploading or downloading without a warrant, as they would have access to private info that you have NOT allowed them access to. You could actually sue them for giving them your info and internet habits.|
|posted by (2011-05-31 18:03:38)|
|Tony yes you are right for the most part but an ISP could get away from monitoring users activity if they disclose the information under the terms of service. Corporations always cover their asses when is comes to the law, $$$=Great Law Team.|
Cablevision has no obligation to monitor Optimum Online Service content. However, Subscriber acknowledges and agrees that Cablevision has the right to monitor content and your use of the Optimum Online Service electronically from time to time and to disclose any information as necessary to satisfy any law, regulation or other governmental request, to operate Optimum Online Service properly, including, but not limited to, monitoring of a Subscriber's access to certain content provided by Cablevision and/or Third-Party Providers, or to protect itself, its Subscribers or any Third-Party Providers.
Third-Party Providers may monitor Subscriber activity. When using an Optimum Online Service provided by a Third-Party Provider, Subscriber is responsible for reviewing any Terms of Service or similar agreement as posted on the Third-Party Provider website which, to the extent not inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, shall bind the Subscriber. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and any Third-Party Provider Terms of Service, Acceptable Use Policy or any other agreements or restrictions, the provisions of this Agreement shall govern.
|As already pointed out by others, yes, many ISP's share ip-addresses between multiple subscribers (often more than two), and on top of that there are IP-cycling systems where ip-addresses get rotated from one subscriber to the next, in an automated fashion in which the ISP people themselves have no knowledge of which subscribers get what ip-address (though they can take a look and find out real-time; this rotating system as far as I know isn't very commonly used anymore, though).|
Then there is the simple fact that yes, people do piggyback on other peoples' connections.
One of my hobbies, whenever I go on a trip, is to take along at least one laptop, sniff out access points that are either open or poorly protected, and get myself online.
In my case, I don't do anything illegal when using those connections (well, except for the fact of popping onto those poorly protected ones) but plenty of other people will have no qualms about doing some dirty rotten things on other folks' connections.
In fact, in the place where I live, which is as close as a tiny village within a city as can be, I know of no less than three groups that boast about how they can and will use other peoples' connections to do p2p and one of those groups even gets those connections involved in DDoS attacks, often even without the connections' "owners" knowing about it.
Hm.... maybe we should all go camp in John Steele's backyard, and see how long it lasts before some 500 people are using his connection to download massive ammounts of hardcore bestiality or something like that >.<
On a funny note... John Steele, representing those porn companies...
Dick Steele, a character in many porn movies.
|On a funny note... John Steele, representing those porn companies...|
Dick Steele, a character in many porn movies.
Yea he has a rusty dik....
|posted by (2011-06-01 01:36:55)|
|lock up my IP address and it will slip through the bars and be away, under cover of night of course||
Most Popular Stories