said by MaynardKrebs:and with 2.4 billion people on the net said by racer123:
Here's food for thought.
Take it back 20 years technology.
A bunch of kids all record part of songs off the radio, and all take individual bits, all get together and their teacher helps them splice the tape together in their film studio class.
Who commited the crime? Each of the kids for providing a part of the song, or the teacher for helping them splice it all together?
It's the argument that the NRA uses in the USA - guns don't kill, people do. Only in this case it's the people & the software.
I really don't have a big problem with copyright *owners* protecting their economic interests - I write software and I'm pretty protective of what I do too. But I'd never seek ridiculous damage amounts as Voltage is seeking - just the actual value of the lost sale and my costs in seeking restitution.
The technical "methodology" Canipre used is flawed and deserves to be trashed. The claim of 'commercial infringement' is so ludicrous that Voltage deserves to be laughed out of court, with costs awarded against them.
I disagree with TSI's log retention policy and hope that they see the light and reduce the amount of data and timeframe they hold on to them. That said, TSI did pretty much all they could in court given the hand they were dealt at the time.
I hope that come January 14th that TSI will strongly advocate for CIPPIC to be permitted to join the case, because it isn't a slam dunk that CIPPIC will be permitted to do so by the Court. TSI also had better be prepared to advance large parts of CIPPIC's case in the event that CIPPIC is denied the opportunity by the Court.