|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kosmiq
Posts: 2304
Location: Somewhere
|
 Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006 05:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Here in sweden there is a case with a screenshot as "proof". In one court it was enough as proof. BUT the one accused of filesharing decided to go on with it and take it to a higher instance. As a response to APB (Antipiratbyrån, the ones hunting pirates around here) Piratbyrån (the opposite, thinking that piracy is good (ok its a little more complicated then that but they have a good point in many cases) ) created a neat little webscript that "generates" screenshots of DC++ with a movie being downloaded and an IP adress. Just to prove how easy it is to fake it.
And with todays world of dynamic IP's I think it is worthless to use a screenshot or a logfile as "proof" as it can easily be made up by anyone that can use paint/notepad.
One thing is sure, if they would accuse me I would not accept that they brought a screenshot of my (for the time being) IP adress with some .rar files I am downloading.
Behold his GLORY! Bow for the technical master!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006 08:42 Post subject: |
|
|
here in israel we got some copyright protection companies trying to get the isp's to log their clients ip supply them with proofs in case that someone was reported. but such actions defy the privacy rights of the clients and the isp's would never accept.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spankie
VIP Member
Posts: 2958
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006 15:25 Post subject: |
|
|
thats why they always need to get your pc to put you in jail. As far as i know, noone has been convicted because of a logfile.They always need to come to your house and take your HD.
but be sure that ISP log everything. I once had a visit from the cops, nothing warez related though, but they know which usernames you login with. Which files you download, which sites you visit. It can be a good hint to come to your house a take a look.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spankie
VIP Member
Posts: 2958
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006 17:03 Post subject: |
|
|
@photish, ssl FTW indeed.
it is illegal when you download a .rar that has copyright protected content. It doenst matter if you use it, redistribute it, unpack it... even if you download some weird extension that you cannot run on your computer, but can be unpacked on another box and it appears to be a movie or game, you are screwed.
But then again, the logfile at the ISP goes "downloading dev-cod1.rar" thats no proof. But if they see 1000 files like that, they can come and visit you, take your pc, and proof that it is illegal content.
With uploading it is easier, this is why P2P users only get convicted for uploading. Once you send a copyright protected file outside, a legal instance can accept this file, check it, see that is illegal, get your ip, call ISP; and this is a proof as well, because you send them the file.
Thats why downloading isnt that easy to proof as an illegal activity and only uploaders get busted.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006 17:15 Post subject: |
|
|
Spankie, about the downloading part, it might be different where you are, but all im saying is, they have no proof about me KNOWING Im conducting an illiegal act... So that would never hold in court HERE...
However I agree with you on the uploading part, but still the dude im sending it to, IS NOT proof enough. There are so many factors in this, like personal vendatta or pr stunt or whatever motive, some dude could have to frame another dude or me... or you 
BUT, if they DO get the warrent to come and get your HD, and it has illegal content, then your are fucked but even then there are ways to get out, like telling you get virus/hacked/trojaned, and somebody set up a cloacked fileserver on your workstation(ofcourse you would need to prove this)
My mates father is a laywer for the goverment here, he handles and signs the new laws that they want to aprove... so everytime somebody dont wanna fix some hardware even dough its still got warrenty, I just call him... when he calls back, I get PRIMO service 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spankie
VIP Member
Posts: 2958
Location: Belgium
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 16th Apr 2006 18:14 Post subject: |
|
|
i dont think that they really give a shit cuz ppl still sell tons of warez on every market and nothing happens.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006 00:57 Post subject: |
|
|
If you're scared of it, go and get hamaci (or whatever it's called/spelled) and only share files with good rl friends/internet people that you trust, and you're pretty much 99.99% safe, unles one of them sells you out, hehe.
I know people at Rikskrim here in sweden that use DC/torrents... so if you're in sweden it's not worth worrying about getting busted when the cops are doing it aswell =p.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kosmiq
Posts: 2304
Location: Somewhere
|
| Posted: Mon, 17th Apr 2006 05:10 Post subject: |
|
|
They actually working on investigating some policeman here in sweden that used p2p... 
But I don't feel worried anyway, its not like I am sharing 2000TB's on a server in my apartment....
Behold his GLORY! Bow for the technical master!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Apr 2006 00:14 Post subject: Re: a thought on getting sued for copyright infringement |
|
|
| Perry Rhodan wrote: | | I don't understand why nobody that got sued so far has thought of that or am I missing something here? |
You act as though you would be sued by another individual with limited resources. This is not an equal playing field. Companies like the RIAA and MPAA have massive resources and highly trained lawyers ready to crush their foes. They can hire the best representation money can buy. Will the average MPAA/RIAA/etc target have the resources to counter that? No. Look at how they've ripped apart entire companies like Napster, Grokster, etc. through prolonged litigation.
Why don't more people fight the RIAA/MPAA/etc in court? Simple. They come to you and offer to settle for less than what it would cost to hire a lawyer to fight them. Furthermore, if you lose at trial, you still owe the lawyer and you're now looking at judgment potentially in the millions. Its like that movie "Saw": do you cut off your foot to save your life, or do you sit chained in the room until you die? Neither scenario is very pleasant. Going to represent yourself in court? You might as well let them get the default judgment against you.
But to answer your question: If the MPAA/RIAA/etc sue you in civil court, their burden of proof is much lower than if the government were going to press charges against you in criminal court. In the USA (and presumably other places), the MPAA/RIAA only needs to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence (the scale tipped slightly in their favor). The RIAA/MPAA/etc will bring in an expert who designed the computer program that captured your IP address. They'll explain how it works to the judge/jury. They might even bring in the person who actually logged your IP address using the program. They'll explain what file you downloaded or what file they downloaded from you. Perhaps you'll raise some questions of doubt, but do you really think the average judge/jury is going to believe the RIAA/MPAA made up some bogus text file with your IP address to frame you? That you didn't try to download/upload that P. Diddy song? They'll establish their case well enough to tip the scales in their favor, and you'll lose. Sad but true.
I don't know of any individual who has won their lawsuit against the RIAA since the P2P lawsuits began. If you know differently, please enlighten me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Apr 2006 21:52 Post subject: |
|
|
Siddhartha: Well good for me that i'm not a US citizen, or to quote Marge Simpson "Let's go Homer, people like us can't afford justice..."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Apr 2006 23:11 Post subject: |
|
|
| Perry Rhodan wrote: | | Siddhartha: Well good for me that i'm not a US citizen, or to quote Marge Simpson "Let's go Homer, people like us can't afford justice..." |
Where are you from? I'd be surprised if the burden of proof for a plaintiff in a civil action is much higher in your country than in the USA. If it were really that easy to beat the RIAA/MPAA, don't you think more people would fight their cases pro se and win?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 21st Apr 2006 01:44 Post subject: |
|
|
Sid, you sound like a lawyer. I understand the whole “burden of proof for a plaintiff” thing.
I hope this is not too far off topic.
So far, I am under the impression that the RIAA/MPAA can’t sue Canadians due to copy right infringements both civilly and criminally. I believe there was a supreme court case about this. This makes me wonder about how they are able to go after people in other countries, or even put pressure on them. Is it that Country's governments allow them to, or decide it’s ok? unlike Canada that said, “NO”.
This also makes wonder if the Canadian isp’s are using RIAA/MPAA as an excuse to limit and cap their customers DL/UL. God Forbid people actually use the unlimited bandwidth IP’s advertise and that customers pay for.
@spankie - Makes total sense they would go after uploaders if it was easier to prove, never thought of that. I thought it had something to do with enabling an illeg. act or something like that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fraich3
Posts: 2907
Location: Not from my mouth!
|
| Posted: Fri, 21st Apr 2006 02:19 Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder why the film companies are willing to pay a huge amount of money to organisations like the RIAA/MPAA. First they cant possible think they are going to catch every single pirate out there, secondly i think they pay more then they get back through lawsuits.
And last but not least, the whole idea of how many money the industry loose every year is stupid. How many of the mp3 files that i have would i have bought, and if i see a good movie i buy the dvd, just because people download doesnt necesairly mean they would have bought it if downloading wasnt so easy.
"Zipfero is the biggest fucking golddigger ever" - Mutantius
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 21st Apr 2006 02:56 Post subject: |
|
|
I know what would solve hollywoods problems. Make movies that arnt complete shit, i wouldnt dare purchase a movie that is crap. I buy all the movies that i like.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 21st Apr 2006 12:24 Post subject: |
|
|
| pistolshrimp wrote: | Sid, you sound like a lawyer. I understand the whole “burden of proof for a plaintiff” thing.
I hope this is not too far off topic.
So far, I am under the impression that the RIAA/MPAA can’t sue Canadians due to copy right infringements both civilly and criminally. I believe there was a supreme court case about this. This makes me wonder about how they are able to go after people in other countries, or even put pressure on them. Is it that Country's governments allow them to, or decide it’s ok? unlike Canada that said, “NO”.
This also makes wonder if the Canadian isp’s are using RIAA/MPAA as an excuse to limit and cap their customers DL/UL. God Forbid people actually use the unlimited bandwidth IP’s advertise and that customers pay for.
@spankie - Makes total sense they would go after uploaders if it was easier to prove, never thought of that. I thought it had something to do with enabling an illeg. act or something like that. |
In general, you're subject to the laws of your country. Although I suppose its theoretically possible that some group like the RIAA could attempt to sue people in other countries under a long-arm statute, typically you'd just see people in other countries being sued by their country's version of the RIAA/MPAA, like Canada's CRIA. Remember the case of Dmitry Sklyarov, a lead programmer for Russian software company ElcomSoft, who was arrested while visiting the United States for the annual Defcon hacker convention because of his software that removed the restrictions on encrypted Adobe Acrobat files?
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,45298,00.html
I know that isn't typical, but its still not inconceivable that people with strong connections to the USA could be sued in the USA.
As for Canada:
http://www.p2pnet.net/cria/canada.pdf (BMG Canada Inc. v. John Doe, 2004 F.C. 488)
I looked at the case above, but as far as I can tell its still on appeal. I wouldn't say that case legalizes file sharing...as I read it, it simply blocks the CRIA and other such organizations from using your IP address to get your personal information (to sue you) without more proof (which would be hard to provide). I don't think it would stop the Canadian police from arresting you for copyright infringement.
Can you tell me the name of the Canadian case that legalized sharing copyright protected files? If its the one above, I'd say you've still got to wait for the final outcome, as that was the first step in the litigation. You'll also have to face the fact that even if you win at court, organizations like the CRIA will use their money and influence to change the laws to "protect" their rights. Unless file sharing is immensely important to all Canadians, I'd bet most of your politicians would be willing to change the copyright laws in exchange for the CRIA's support. It appears the RIAA/MPAA and such organizations are attempting massive legislative changes in the US and across Europe (particularly in the EU laws).
for example: http://usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/Archive/2006/Feb/16-805116.html
As for capping bandwidth, I'd guess its more of an excuse than a necessity. Perhaps the ISPs are trying to protect themselves against another wave of litigation by taking some preventative measures, but sounds more like another way to cut costs. From what I've read, heavy downloaders are generally a small percentage of the overall users and they cost the ISPs the most money. The blocks possibly help keep the CRIA and others off their back in light of the case above, plus the blocks won't affect the average user. Its like buying gas: if the price is high but all the competition is charging the same price, what choice does the consumer have but to pay? Its just a bad situation all around.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Apr 2006 07:16 Post subject: |
|
|
I don’t remember the name of the Canadian case that I mentioned before, but it didn’t legalize it, only said RIAA/MPAA/FBI can’t sue Canadians. Basically, they are to stay on their side of the 49th parallel. Newspaper, not net source.
So,.... it’s not the same case as BMG Canada Inc. v. John Doe, 2004 F.C. 488. The case you mentioned is the first I have heard involving ISP’s in Canada. Great info, thanks for the link. In my case the RIAA/MPAA were about going after individual people, and not the ISP providers. I think it was in 2003 in May. It mainly focused on Kaza and a fraction of limewire. (They had just successfully sued {big unloaders I think} in the states) now were going after Canadians.
I remember this because I was at a baby shower and about 5 idiots were talking about it. They were warning people to delete anything that had been downloaded off limewire, blah blah blah. (as if that would help) I just sat there with my mouth shut, not saying a word, and this was just AFTER supreme court decided RIAA/MPAA can’t sue Canadians.
Very interesting about the isp case. So Shaw does have a legal interest in limiting bandwidth, and not just cheeping out on us.
P2P will always adapt
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
