Law Firm Calling BitTorrent’s Architecture a Reason for Mass LitigationAdded: Thursday, July 1st, 2010
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Current Events
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
The USCG (US Copyright Group) argued that the architecture of BitTorrent network differs significantly from the older peer-to-peer protocols, and claimed it to be a reason for launching mass litigation.
The DC-based law firm, trying to develop a new business model targeted at profiting from suing thousands of BitTorrent users, has been forced by the court to justify the basis for combining thousands of file-sharers into one lawsuit.
As there are not very many reasons for doing that, the USCG argues that in this particular case each BitTorrent user is becoming a part of the single transaction blamed for sharing copyrighted content.
The US Copyright Group believes that the architecture of the BitTorrent network considerably differs from those of the older peer-to-peer protocols, which, correspondingly, is the reason for the case to differ from other trials having targeted only one individual at a time. In addition, BitTorrent users create tracker websites that form special networks aimed at sharing a certain file, and such joint series of transactions justify their being targeted by a single lawsuit.
Meanwhile, the EFF in cooperation with the ACLU and Public Citizen have been arguing at the court that the law firm has no jurisdiction over unknown individual defendants that the subpoenas should identify.
The EFF’s attorney called these requirements for the accused to defend in D.C., regardless of where they are from, and lumping thousands of defendants into a single lawsuit “stacking the deck” against the users. At the same time the law firm seems to consider time off work alongside with travel and lodging expenses to DC just minor inconveniences.
However, the US Copyright Group’s argument for combining BitTorrent file-sharers together in a single lawsuit because of their comprising a single swarm at some time may turn to be a biggest flaw. Since any file-sharer only contributes a very minor part to the process, they should have a fair use claim, because the part to share can’t be considered a large portion of the copyrighted file. And that can be the solution for defenders: most of the users have possibly contributed just a few MBs to the downloaders in a swarm transferring a 4,2Gb copy of the copyrighted film that the US Copyright Group presents, which can hardly justify the basis for seeking the damages of thousands of dollars.
July 1st, 2010Posted by:
Thursday, July 1st, 2010
|posted by (2010-07-01 14:40:25)|
|Thanks again Sam for a great read. The last paragraph makes perfect sense to me. Seems like it's gonna cost these law firms an awful lot with no guaranteed return. Justice may yet raise its lovely head.|
|Mark my words, a year or two from now the industry will be referencing this whole campaign as another failed attempt to learn from. Americans will be looking back and saying, "I remember that whole fiasco". Again, it's already been tried and failed miserably in the UK.|
|posted by (2010-07-01 15:12:47)|
|well, the last paragraph works if the defendant in question is there for seeding, but that is not the case, they are going after people that they have caught downloading, which even though they can only prove that the person in question received a small chunk, that is enough for a warrent and when they search your computer they Assume to find the rest of that file (if not thousands of more files)|
But since they know the downloader in question doesnt want his computer searched they contact him by 1. Contacting his service provider with threats (ie: the Verizon/Comcast letters we get) 2. Filing this law suit in hopes of getting the person to settle without having to actually spend more money first...
THE USCG is the ones seeding.. and they are recording everyone who takes a bite from their file, thats how they get our IP'p, filename and timestamp. Its called entrapment, and we can blow their whole scheme if someone can figure out who is doing the actual seeding that they are recording. It is also why they need all these subpoenas, they ONLY have the IP address, why? because they got it from their seeding utorrent info....
|Brynn217 - if it is really what they are doing then they have shot themselves in the head legally. You can not put some out there then when some one then takes it because you offered it IS NOT ILLEGAL AND YOU CAN NOT BE SUED OR CRIMINALLY CHARGED ALSO.|
Like I have a cop next to me at a street corner; I take out my wallet and pull money in it so it is sticking out. Now I say to people passing by take the money, and if ones does and they will. What? I turn to the cop and say arrest them they took my money? The cop should look at me and call me a very stupid person; but that is exactly what the copyright holders are doing; but using a data file instead..
The one thing I have seen is where is their REAL PROOF? I have not seen it.. They use IP, File name as proof? That can get thrown out very fast. We all know popular files LMFAO like the "Hurt Locker" can and does get renamed.. Have you not gotten a data file played it and some one had renamed a PORNO MOVIE INSTEAD.
Now if the ISP's would have the balls and say to the copyright holders SHOW US THE PROOF YOU GOT THIS FROM OUR CLIENT..
Documented proof, IP, name of file, AND THE FILE IN A LEGIBLE FORMAT to be seen..
THAT IS WHY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER sends threat letters - or I should say the puke lawyers who talked the copyright holder into this action. Then anyone dumb enough to respond would now get a warrant to have their computer taken so the copyright hold can search it and get the needed evidence against you..
If any if you are smart the drive you use to store "data" on should be in a docking station where you can remove it from your computer and drop it into a degaussing box... NEVER EVER store "data" on a drive installed in your computer. I do this as a security reason if my computer gets stolen.
|@menahunie - That's what we really need on here. An article on "Simple Ways to Hide Yourself"! I'd love to hear some of the tactics that some may recommend. Everything from TrueCrypt to removable drives; none of this bullshit where you pay some site to hide your identity, only to find that they have logged all of your info and actions on the Internet. IP address makes absolutely no case in my eyes, you have to CATCH me in possession of the actual file, you bitches!|
|Yes, that's right: an "Article" request!||
Most Popular Stories