It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MPAA Says No Proof Needed in P2P Copyright Infringement Lawsuits

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:58 AM
link   
This is about MONEY.

Civil or criminal - one aspect of the legal system that stands in their way is that of 'discovery'. They have to provide the court with the evidence. They have found over the last few years that the computer savvy thwarted them in their efforts to 'make it seem' like it was cut and dry - you share - you steal.

The problem was they can't prove you share. EVER. Just having something on you machine isn't the same thing as sharing.

They want to do away with that part of discovery because it costs them too much to 'prove' their case. - lowering the profit of the suit.

These people are racketeers, using the legal system to create revenue. Their lawyers should be disbarred for allowing and be complicit in such cases.




posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by danx
Tell that to the people in Guantanamo!

Boy, you just can't stay on the topic at hand.

Yes, I will tell them that since they are not U.S. citizens therefore don't have the rights provided under the Constitution. Geesh!


The argument can go both ways, if a non citizen should be given any constitutional rights while in custody of the U.S. Government. But do we really want our boys and gals catch the blow back of our actions? I say lets lead by example, this current administration is not doing a good job at that.

Now to go back on topic, It's a result of the current atmosphere that this country lives in. While I haven't followed these court cases it my hopes that most of these court cases would be thrown out for lack of evidence. Any sane person willing to stand up to these thugs has a lot of ammunition to ward off these accusations, the problem is most people # there pants and just settle out of court.

I'd like to give a hand to this single mother for standing up to these guys!

[edit on 24-6-2008 by oconnection]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by oconnection
 

From your post:
"I'd like to give a hand to this single mother for standing up to these guys! "

I missed this. I went through the whole thread to find what happened.
Got to put in a link to that.

So granted we have nothing unless bought through their channels and
must save all sales slips to prove our innocence.

Sounds true blue Illuminati to me.

So how do I enjoy the net without the interference of having to
pay fine after fine after fine.

Find that single mom. Yahoo.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Didn't read all posts as there were way too many off-topic posts, and I didnt feel like going through all of the same BS


Anyways, I think its understandable the MPAA reacts like this. It surprises me how many people think so easy about this. do people who share Music CD's, DVD's and such over P2P ever realise what they are actually doing?

If I would tell someone I robbed a record store, stole 100 DVD's, 200 CD's and a handfull of games for various gaming platforms, people would probably call the cops on me. Those same people can be witnessed the next weekend downloading the latest Phil Collins "Best of" album. Many of you here on ATS could fit the above description.

Why is it that a physical crime is frowned upon, however anonymous internet "stealing" is no problem?

And when the MPAA wants to do something about it, sending out "threats" like this people just react like they have no right? Sure, Innocent before proven guilty should always be in effect, but when it comes to this, not alot of people are "innocent"


[edit on 24-6-2008 by Tunedbeats]

[edit on 24-6-2008 by Tunedbeats]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


what are you talking about? OJ was not a victim of double jeopardy. he was found not guilty in the criminal coury, but guilty in the civil court and had to pay damages.

loopholes are not illegal.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SRTkid86
 


Besides, OJ did it so IMO he was lucky to get off from the criminal side. And he rigs it so he doesn't have to pay squat so all in all I think OJ can consider himself fortunate.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Sigh....


Please Stay On Topic

The derailing in this thread is atrocious!



No more warnings, folks.

MPAA Says No Proof Needed in P2P Copyright Infringement Lawsuits



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   
I wonder if the MPAA/RIAA have ever 'prosecuted' someone with this ridiculous 'no proof' of infringement that actually was presenting a P2P as a copyrighted work, but the file was actually mislabeled.

I honestly do not see how anyone could get 'prosecuted' for this, when there is no way to know with out actually downloading the files, what their actual content is.

Or how they would know if someone was P2Ping and file that was, say, the movie Men In Black. But instead of 'calling' it that, it was called Nem Ni Kcalb, or something else completely. How would they ever know? I mean I understand that the number of seeders is important in P2P, but how would the watch-dog groups even know without downloading Nem Ni Kcalb and actually violating their own copyright, which someone pointed out isn't really legally possible.

I don't know. It just seems like a big scam to force people to repurchase the right to play a song that they may have already purchased two to three times depending on format. I have never purchased a song from iTunes, or any other mp3 site. I have never knowingly illegally downloaded or uploaded any song. And yet, if I 'accidentally' leave my sharing settings open on a P2P network, the 40+ gigs of 192kb mp3s that I laboriously ripped from my cd collection could cause me to get served with court documents?

That is the stupidest rationales I have heard. These are people that pay millions of dollars in order to indoctrinate their intellectual properties into our psyches, and then want to charge us over and over and over for the privilege. Then on top of that, after we have allowed their intellectual property to remain in our psyche, and computer, they want to bill us for it being there....

Sheesh.
DocMoreau



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
The Inexact Science Behind D.M.C.A. Takedown Notices


"A new study from the University of Washington suggests that media industry trade groups are using flawed tactics in their investigations of users who violate copyrights on peer-to-peer file sharing networks.

Those trade groups, including the Motion Picture Association of America (M.P.A.A.) Entertainment Software Association (E.S.A.) and Recording Industry Association of America (R.I.A.A.), send universities and other network operators an increasing number of takedown notices each year, asserting that their intellectual property rights have been violated under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Many universities pass those letters directly on to students without questioning the veracity of the allegations. The R.I.A.A. in particular follows up some of those notices by threatening legal action and forcing reported file-sharers into a financial settlement.."


bits.blogs.nytimes.com...



How To Frame a Printer For Copyright Infringement


"Have you ever wondered what it takes to get 'caught' for copyright infringement on the Internet? Surprisingly, actual infringement is not required. The New York Times reports that researchers from the computer science department at the University of Washington have just released a study that examines how enforcement agencies monitor P2P networks and what it takes to receive a complaint today. Without downloading or sharing a single file, their study attracted more than 400 copyright infringement complaints. Even more disturbing is their discovery that illegal P2P participation can be easily spoofed; the researchers managed to frame innocent desktop machines and even several university printers, all of which received bogus complaints."


tech.slashdot.org...


[edit on 24-6-2008 by d11_m_na_c05]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:36 PM
link   
I recall a torrent site provider was given notice of a complaint.
So the site knew what to do.
It moved on to another provider.
Now this was a fully monitored and scrutinized site by the members.
Now if they go after bootleggers too they might be in trouble.

The only download site I recall that snitched was kazaa for a woman that
signed up for her child. Some 1000 download rule that may have cost
her $1000.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


What is wrong with these idiots that say things like 'terrorists don't have rights'?

How about "Murderers don't have rights", "Child molesters don't have rights", "Bank Robbers don't have rights"?

The WHOLE POINT is that a person IS NOT GUILTY of being WHATEVER "label" you chose to assign them until it is proven.

Sheesh I can't believe people



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 05:59 AM
link   
you know the riaa and the mpaa call it stealing, piracy. Let me ask you this, have you ever rented a movie from the discount bin? back in the day, did you ever record a movie to vhs from tv? did you ever record a song from the radio? All this was done in the 80's and early 90's and you know what, it wasn't illegal. What became illegal was Digital media being transfer. The DMCA, made copying this stuff illegal, yet this is what alot of users we doing for the last 20years. It doesn't make sense. All of a sudden it was impacting there business model? I say no, its always been there, its always been part of the business model. There just trying to make more profit from the system. Until The Major business's STOP contributing delinquency of the population by having DVD-RW's, or 500 G hard drives, then they shouldn't expect the population to stop doing this. If its illegal implement a system that if you can show proof of purchase, you can be reimbursed for damaged material at cost, + s&h. That alone would eliminate alot of pirates. Combine that with a serious lowering of cost, cause lets face it, I'm not going to pay $16 for a cd that has 1 good song on it. I will pay 80cents for that song though. Its all about adjusting the business model, which these idiots just don't get. This is why ITUNEs is so big.

I personally, "have never" (will admit to) downloading. I can honestly say, I don't upload, as I use VOIP and kills my phone. Never admit, demand proof, told to experts in the field, and counter sue the PISS out of them. I personally like Defamation of charater.

Cheers,

Camain



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Why should anyone care what the vastly overpriced 'entertainment' industry thinks? Is it because some dum bass can't keep selling $25 cd's ?

I know many musicians and would be more than happy to pay $10 bucks for one of theirs.

What makes these people so special they deserve to have hundreds of millions of dollars, and the people I see everyday working their asses off are losing their houses?

The industry as a whole is garbage.
Listen to any radio station that is not listener paid.
Real musicians don't mind people listening to their music.

Movies? Garbage.
Will Smith is doing nothing that warrants a $20M payday.
They should all be paid hourly.

It's all Paris Hilton crap now.
Famous for being famous......and getting paid for it.

As a pirate I will always take what I want from the internet without paying for it.
I pay my ISP, the information comes with it.

So go ahead and tell me I am ruining a industry.....
All I will do is smile and say " Screw you".



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grafilthy
Why should anyone care what the vastly overpriced 'entertainment' industry thinks? Is it because some dum bass can't keep selling $25 cd's ?

I know many musicians and would be more than happy to pay $10 bucks for one of theirs.

What makes these people so special they deserve to have hundreds of millions of dollars, and the people I see everyday working their asses off are losing their houses?

The industry as a whole is garbage.
Listen to any radio station that is not listener paid.
Real musicians don't mind people listening to their music.

Movies? Garbage.
Will Smith is doing nothing that warrants a $20M payday.
They should all be paid hourly.

It's all Paris Hilton crap now.
Famous for being famous......and getting paid for it.

As a pirate I will always take what I want from the internet without paying for it.
I pay my ISP, the information comes with it.

So go ahead and tell me I am ruining a industry.....
All I will do is smile and say " Screw you".



Shhh... dont say that
.

Man what's more atrocious is computer software. You know autocad? that thing is like $3000 for 1 copy. Windows is absurd as well.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   
try adobe creative sweet, 5k, or any billing server software 10k +, I just wish someday I could afford it. then i could use it



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Just go to China, they'll get you the software and install it for you and crack it for you all for only... hmmm 2/7... 30 cents



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join