Quote:
Originally Posted by will76
Exactly, also like pulling someone over and there is drugs found in the car, the driver gets nailed with it almost all the time even if it was one of the passengers who hide it under the seat. The examples can go on and on. The ip going back to the owner is really no different. If it isn't the person who pays the internet bill then chances are it is someone in the house or that they know. At that point the guilty part will step up or be outed by the person being accused. If someone really didn't do it I would hope they would fight it and either turn in the person who did or defend themselves if they really weren't behind it.
I can guarantee you if someone hacked my connection and downloaded some videos I would fight it and win. 9 out of 10 times the guilty party either settles or ignores it because they know they were guilty. The people who respond back vigerously that they really didn't do it and that they will fight them or make them prove their case in court will probably never get sued.
Remember, these attorneys get paid on contingency and they are dealing with large volumes here. The time, resources and money it takes to drag one person to court and try to prove it they could have made 1000x more money from getting 100s of people to settle. Its a numbers game, they don't want to go to court any more than you do. Its like they are shooting at a flock of birds with a shot gun, not a pistol. So what if they miss a few its just too easy to point the shot gun up and pull the trigger and hit 100 than it is to take the time to aim a pistol and try to shoot them out of the sky one at a time.
|
Sigh.
1) There are specific laws in SOME states that make the owner of a car responsible, even if they weren't the ones driving.
2) Drugs in your house or car gets you charged with possession, not ownership. There is no similar law for owning an IP used to download copyrighted material as far as I know.
3) You are correct in that the people shooting the shotgun don't want to go to court. The reason for this is that it is a losing proposition since they would then be forced to prove something that is nearly impossible to prove. The entire point that DamianJ made is that when you take this shotgun approach innocent people are guaranteed to be involved. The courts do not like this kind of blanket bullshit and they are already challenging it in courts outside of the USA. I linked to an article that shows someone was barred from practicing law for 6 months for similar bullshit. Steve has publicly stated that this is all about blame and shame, he wants them to pay or face exposure. How do you think THAT would go over in a court of law if someone brought it up? If you think it will gain him any sympathy from the legal system you are crazy.
__________________
Hands Free Adult - Join Once, Earn For Life
"I try to make a habit of bouncing my eyes up to the face of a beautiful woman, and often repeat “not mine” in my head or even verbally. She’s not mine. God has her set aside. She’s not mine. She’s His little girl, and she needs me to fight for her by keeping my eyes where they should be."