dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
5
share rss forum feed

analog andy

join:2005-01-03
Surrey, BC
reply to racer123

Re: Blog - Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

said by racer123:

Yeah, Its the Motion recort file, with the motion affidavit and the statement of claim therein contained.

Yah this is the text

6. Between September 1 and October 30, 2012, Canipre used forensic software to scan
BitTorrent networks for the presence of the Works. The forensic software searched
BitTorrent networks for files corresponding to the Works and identified the IP
address of each seeder or peer who was offering any of these files for transfer or
distribution. This information is available to anyone that is connected to the P2P
network;
7. The forensic software downloaded the copies of the Works available for distribution
on the P2P networks and for each file downloaded recorded the following identifying
information:
a. the IP address assigned to the peer by his or her internet service provider
(“ISP”) at the time it distributed the file;
b. the date and time at which the file was distributed by the seeder or peer;
c. the P2P network utilized by the peer; and
d. the file’s metadata, which includes the name of the file and the size of the file
(collectively, the “File Data”);
8. Canipre analyzed each of the BitTorrent packets distributed by the IP addresses
contained in File Data and verified that reassembling the pieces results in a fully
4
playable digital motion picture that is one of the Works. Canipre verified this by
viewing a control copy of each of the Works side by side with the digital media files
being distributed on the P2P network and confirming that they were the same;
9. Canipre reviewed the File Data and identified the transactions associated with IP
addresses for customers of TekSavvy in Ontario that used the BitTorrent network to
reproduce and distribute the Works during the period of September 1 to October 30,
2012 (the “Distributors”);
So Canpire

Found the movies in question on Bittorrent

Recorded the IP's that were seeding the movies

Downloaded the movies in full and compared them with a movie file they have?

Or Downloaded each piece and pieced the file together manually to get a whole movie or are they talking about the torrent software combing the pieces into a complete file and then comparing it?

RobOutback

join:2011-07-18

said by analog andy:

So Canpire

Found the movies in question on Bittorrent

Recorded the IP's that were seeding the movies

Downloaded the movies in full and compared them with a movie file they have?

Or Downloaded each piece and pieced the file together manually to get a whole movie or are they talking about the torrent software combing the pieces into a complete file and then comparing it?

Okay, if we assume that Canipire's software is accurate:

Looks like they simply combined pieces from a whole bunch of seeders and peers into one file, then verified the file was one of their movies. Which is what a typical bittorrent client would do, so I wouldn't expect them to do anything more.

However, it's highly doubtful that any single seeder provided a complete copy of a movie to them. So, the question that the court needs to answer is how much of a movie needs to be shared in order for that to be considered illegal?

Also, this procedure only verifies that people are uploading the file, it doesn't guarantee that any of the peers have a full copy of the file. For example, what if a user started downloading a movie but cancelled it after 10% was downloaded? Is he guilty of pirating the movie? Or could he argue that he killed the download after he realized it was a pirated movie?

Is sharing a movie (such as what bittorrent does by default) more "nasty" than downloading only? What if you turn off uploading in bittorrent, but Canpire's software marks your IP address as a sharer because you still belong to the swarm?

There are SO MANY QUESTIONS that the court needs to answer. We really do need a test-case to find out what the new law allows and disallows.

The intent of the law is clear: don't pirate movies. But the details are not at all clear, nor are the penalties.