How does the Copyright Group tell which ips downloaded the movies?
they hire a watchdog firm to place a copy of the film in a torrent client and track the IP address's that connect to request it. The watchdog firm OFC does not upload any data, and has permission to download it. Anybody that runs torrents should have an updated blocklist, and that usually includes the IP address's of these watchdog firms. They are questionable anyway because they can prove you have a complete copy, they can only prove that your torrent client connected to them, looking for information about this torrent.
Doesn't sound like that could be legal for a court case. So if you tried to download it from them it wouldnt even actually download how can the prove you got it?
|reply to Chubbysumo |
If they don't upload any info then there can be no download. Also, if they have permission to upload the file to a filesharing service (where it's reasonable to expect the file to be downloaded)...
I don't see how this can be the basis for civil action. They know for sure the file was not downloaded (because they didn't upload it), and the uploader has permission to upload it to a known distribution channel.
|reply to Chubbysumo |
Isn't this actually entrapment?
Also, isn't this akin to drug busts using 3rd party (non-police) to set up the sale, instead of undercover police? Isn't that illegal, also?
Or does this fall under the category of 'civil law,' or 'we win because we have more money.'
In the US, civil law should be called civil 'lawl' because it's such a joke. It's not whoever has the best case, its whoever has the most money.--
»/im/82288374/5 ··· 5591.png
|reply to vzw emp |
I don't really know about that. Don't t hey arrest child molesters on Dateline NBC by baiting them with a girl of legal age who pretends to be a minor?
I hope that the actual law doesn't allow them to prosecute someone simply for connecting but the law is s strange animal.
|reply to drew1089 |
Drew1089: no, for a criminal case it would be inadmissable in court, but the standards for a civil case are different.
VZWemp: it doesn't matter if they upload any data, most torrent clients can tell you by IP address what percentage done your peer are, and OFC seeds are 100% done. They don't need to prove 100% complete for infringement, they just need to prove you started it, and therefore can imply that you have, or had it complete. Again, civil case standards are much weaker than criminal case standards.
TheRougeX: entrapment for a criminal case, maybe. Civil cases are much different. Many civil cases come Down to funding, and that's why corporations and large companies almost always win. They have already hired the best lawyer, and you as an individual cannot even afford second best.
Fifty nine: those "to catch a predator" episodes are very carefully planned out police stings. What makes it not entrapment is that the criminal "initiates", or starts all the actions, the undercover officers online are not allowed to suggest anything, and cannot have any sentences with "implied" meanings. Also, most of those occur in California, where it is pretty much illegal to even talk about sex ed with a minor, as this could be considered exploitation. Many of those arrested on "to catch a predator are never convicted because the cases solely depend on self-incrimiation, and most of the time they are from many states away, which changes things, because a judged has to look at wether what the suspect did is legal in his or her state of residence.
Prosecuted for copyright infringement:no, as it stands now, it is a civil, and not a criminal matter.