Private Details of Dallas Buyers Club Pirates Won’t Be DisclosedAdded: Saturday, December 19th, 2015
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.cc, 2015
Australian federal court has dismissed a landmark bid by an American movie studio to access the private details of thousands of Internet users accused of illegally downloading Dallas Buyers Club.
The judge ordered to terminate the proceedings after rejecting the latest proposed method by the movie studio to deal with about 5,000 file-sharers accused of pirating the 2013 film. Voltage Pictures can appeal the decision before February.
The judge referred to earlier proposals as to unrealistic and so surreal as to not be taken seriously. Back in April, the movie studio won the right to lodge a discovery order with 6 ISPs in Australia to reveal the names of subscribers who had allegedly downloaded the movie via file-sharing networks. However, the judge pointed out at the time the privacy of the suspects had to be maintained, and any proposed contact with the users by Voltage Pictures had to be approved by the court. In addition, the movie studio was also ordered to pay a $600,000 bond. This was made to prevent the so-called “speculative invoicing” widely used in the cases of such kind: the copyright owners send alleged infringers demands to pay large sums of money under threat of legal action.
A few months ago, the Australian judge rejected Voltage’s first proposed method, which assumed using a letter and phone call asking for personal data about suspected file-sharers, including their salaries. Voltage Pictures also wanted to seek damages for the cost of a single, legitimate download of the movie; the cost of receiving the subscriber’s private details; the number of people who had accessed the uploaded movie and how many other movies had been shared.
The studio made corrections to its proposal a few days ago, going instead to only seek damages for the cost of an individual license fee and its court costs, as well as to charge customers a single penalty instead of the one based on their individual circumstances. The copyright holder also suggested to pay an initial $60,000 bond to access less than 500 names. However, the studio had no success with that – the judge explained that the proposal still remained unrealistic and ruled that “some finality must now be brought to these proceedings”.
Saturday, December 19th, 2015
|i just gotta love this judge !.....|
about time time someone took the stick back and belted these self rightous money hungry bastards........
fancy wanting to know someones financial situation before deciding how much to claim...the rest of the world might be singing a little tune soon...
"aussie aussie aussie......oi oi oi "
cop that corporate you greedy wankers !
|Yes this was better than the rest of the court cases we have seen recently.|
|posted by (2015-12-21 07:52:18)|
|So there is still hope for humanity left!|
This judge should be considered a hero!(kind of)
honestly i think people should just be forced to buy a copy of the movie, and a cinema ticket expense.
anything beyond that is simply unrealistic, for numbers like 600,000 i do expect to have certain right to the film itself.
|I'm an Aussie, and I love my judge.||
Most Popular Stories