ISPs Protested Mass File-Sharing LawsuitsAdded: Tuesday, May 28th, 2013
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, www.extratorrent.com, 2013
A number of ISPs, including AT&T, Verizon, Time Warner and Cox, are currently appealing a district court decision which ordered the companies to reveal the identities of more than a thousand of their subscribers alleged of pirating video content on BitTorrent. The broadband providers argue that their customers may not be those who downloaded the copyrighted content.
Back in 2012, a district court judge, ex RIAA lobbyist, granted the porn company AF Holdings the right to get personal information of over 1000 subscribers alleged of downloading their copyrighted works through BitTorrent. This was a big victory for both the porn studio and its law firm Prenda, because other judges rejected to join such an impressive number of defendants in a single case. But this judge even accused the broadband providers of failing to do enough to stop Internet piracy. Now the ISPs hope to reverse the recent ruling and stop law firms from “commercial invoicing”.
The companies claimed that many judges have previously rejected such cases because the copyright trolls were trying to sue many people at minimal cost, while many of the targeted subscribers aren’t people who actually downloaded the infringing content. Everyone knows that unsecured and shared connections in subscribers’ homes make them the false identities of the real infringers.
Although the porn studio is well aware of this, it is simply not interested in finding the true pirates, but rather in settlements of a few thousands dollars with each defendant. The matter is that the evidence in these cases is never properly tested, and many of the alleged subscribers may be innocent. But those defendants often see settling as the best option in such embarrassing situation, because hiring a lawyer costs the same as the settlement fee.
The broadband providers also mention the controversial nature of the law company Prenda, which was recently punished in court for its “mob-like” tactics. For example, its principals relied on fictitious persons as “clients” and submitted fake documents of their cases. So, the dubious status of the law firm alone may be the reason to overturn the previous ruling.
Subscribers appreciate that their ISPs are trying to protect them and are taking a stand in this case. Obviously, it’s in their own interests too, but it also helps the hundreds of people now and perhaps thousands more in the future. It is unlikely that copyright troll cases are going away at all, but the victory in this case will at least allow the service providers minimize the damage they cause.
May 28th,2013Posted by:
Tuesday, May 28th, 2013
|posted by (2013-05-28 19:19:16)|
|here in uk im with virgin media and download a movie most nights some times excessively but can honestly say i have never had a warning of any sort about illegal downloads so to speak in the 4-5 yrs of being a customer have always wondered if they just ignore the authorities??|
|posted by (2013-05-28 20:15:35)|
|lol trust me you will...virgin grab randomly..and you will get pinched..i said the same thing as as many people have said they wont..all have..been nicked.|
|OK, I am a noob to all this...But how does Extra-torrent handle requests for user info? And how do ISP's know what software or movies are being downloaded? Do ISP's cache downloaded files? if everybody changed the name of what their uploading, would that stop the ambulance chasers?|
|posted by (2013-05-29 00:20:41)|
|Extra torrent doesnt handle requests, your ISP would be the one to receive such a request.Using this article as a example,a lawyer for the porn film company that goes into,say,utorrent,looks for movies from the porn company he represents that are being downloaded. He then can see the peer list which shows everyone who is downloading ip address. Then he sends a letter to your ISP notifying them that the owner or owners of those IP numbers has downloaded copy written material.Courts have ruled that your ISP has no obligation to reveal to said lawyer who the owner of that IP address is and that just because the owners IP address appears in the peer list does not mean they were the ones who downloaded the content.In almost all of these cases the only evidence is the fact that someones IP address has come up,and courts,so far, have ruled that as not evidence.|
|posted by (2013-05-29 00:27:54)|
|I,m with vigin; same as madloo08|
|Since liberty media have now bought Virgin media and the aforementioned is an American company you may well find that at some stage they start sending out notices in said regard,but as stated it then falls to those making the allegations as to your complicity in downloading any files since it is very easy to use an unsecured wifi network and there is also the ability of a lot of people in decrypting wifi and being able to use your wifi without your consent which then leaves the burden of proof down to those sending out these notices.In such cases there are precedences whereby American court judges have ruled against the media merchants and the way in which they blanket notice without solid evidence.|
|posted by (2013-05-29 10:59:40)|
|i had a letter about nearly 5 years ago now..so i can assure you,,you can get a letter..funny thing was it was for one feekin song..to my embarrassment....so google it and check the dates.|
|@brods73 sorry mate BHM is correct you can get warning letters from Virgin, i have had 2 both of which explained it would be better to download large files after 12 at night very helpfull indeed, come down much quicker.|
|posted by (2013-05-29 15:11:07)|
|@mwd25 can the 'spy' look at the peerlist even without sharing themselves? If so doesn't that invalidate the use of IP blocklists (I run a lot in Peerblock) because even if you are blocking transmission of data to/from them, you are still visible.|
Also when does data become a disputable commodity? Say what? If I DL 3% of a movie before deciding I didn't want to see it, what monetary value is 50Mb of random useless data? More so the UL, which if I was maxing DL and UL bandwidth, would be 0.3% of the movie. So altho I have DL and UL a movie file I have not DL or UL the movie just a useless fraction of a movie file. Do they even consider the extent of your UL in a claim - if you UL the movie once, twice, three times over?
As for wifi hacking, do you know if your ISP knows your router activity? I don't use wireless but does my isp know that? If it doesn't I could use the wifi hacked idea as a defence.
|posted by (2013-05-30 19:05:14)|
|interesting feedback but i live in area where u have sky or virgin mostly and i must say non of my friends have ever received warnings either..and #10 is spot on because mine dload a lot faster mid morning times where as in evening seem to be throttled slightly..hope im not shooting myself in foot now but dont even use no blocking programs either so long may it continue and ET is the place 2 be|
|posted by (2013-06-01 16:23:56)|
|13#sounds right that i have herd of letters about excessive dloading but not for illegal dloading|
|I wish COMCAST was fighting, instead they are threatening to cancel service and shit like that. How does COMCAST think that it will make $$ if they cancel my service? I'm just go to their competitor and they'll be more than happy to take my $$$$.||
Most Popular Stories