GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum
Page 2 of 5 < 1 2 345 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Suing IP addresses being challenged. (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=998882)

Barry-xlovecam 11-24-2010 08:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam View Post
In a criminal trial ? beyond a reasonable doubt.

In a civil trial ? the preponderance of the evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery (Post 17723753)
this is for the pay us blackmail letter campaigns

it about the shoddy evidence used to make the threats, and it is a purely civil issue.

so i don't understand the comment.

if anything it means that if the evidence is too shoddy for a civil trial that level of evidence doesn't have prayer of surviving in a criminal trial.
Let me shed some light on this:

An auto is illegally parked and is issued a ticket (a civil infraction and not a crime) ? his auto was parked illegally even if he did not drive it personally.

The same car is involved in a fatal accident ? vehicular manslaughter ? that is a criminal offense (involuntary or with intent (depends on the circumstances)). The owner will not be convicted of vehicular manslaughter unless the state can prove he was actually driving the car.

Copyright infringement (barring aggravating circumstance) is a civil tort ? a civil lawsuit and not an indictable criminal offense.

You may call this blackmail and some will agree. A damaged Plaintiff (read copyright holder) would say he simply wants compensation for the theft of his property.

Who is right here?

gideongallery 11-24-2010 08:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 17726571)
Let me shed some light on this:

An auto is illegally parked and is issued a ticket (a civil infraction and not a crime) — his auto was parked illegally even if he did not drive it personally.

The same car is involved in a fatal accident — vehicular manslaughter — that is a criminal offense (involuntary or with intent (depends on the circumstances)). The owner will not be convicted of vehicular manslaughter unless the state can prove he was actually driving the car.

Copyright infringement (barring aggravating circumstance) is a civil tort — a civil lawsuit and not an indictable criminal offense.

You may call this blackmail and some will agree. A damaged Plaintiff (read copyright holder) would say he simply wants compensation for the theft of his property.

Who is right here?


but the point is that ip address as proof has been knocked down.

with an open wifi it actually any machine within 150 feet (given range, and lackluster encryption standards)

so it really like saying that your get a ticket for parking your car illegally, because your car is the same color as the car parked illegally.

That the point

an ip address is not proper identification (the equilvalent of a licience plate registered to the owner)

you can blame the DMCA btw, by making it illegal to circumvent encryption, they pretty much killed the advancement of encryption key, of course hacking tools didn't stop improving (and neither did processing power) so the encryption keys that would have stopped a brute force attack 10 years ago do shit against the current tools.

Barry-xlovecam 11-24-2010 09:05 PM
Knock yourselves out ...
 
28 : http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...-p2p-users.ars
29 : http://www.copyrightdefenseagency.com/
30 : http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...1#comments-bar
35 : http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...s-from-sap.ars

Barry-xlovecam 11-24-2010 09:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery (Post 17726580)
but the point is that ip address as proof has been knocked down.

with an open wifi it actually any machine within 150 feet (given range, and lackluster encryption standards)

so it really like saying that your get a ticket for parking your car illegally, because your car is the same color as the car parked illegally.

That the point

an ip address is not proper identification (the equilvalent of a licience plate registered to the owner)

you can blame the DMCA btw, by making it illegal to circumvent encryption, they pretty much killed the advancement of encryption key, of course hacking tools didn't stop improving (and neither did processing power) so the encryption keys that would have stopped a brute force attack 10 years ago do shit against the current tools.
Tell it to the judge ...

Redrob 11-24-2010 09:20 PM
We shouldn't go after the end users. We have enough PR problems without alienating our customers.

Most of the time I think we should go after the uploaders and hosting servers.

Just my opinion.

Barry-xlovecam 11-24-2010 09:34 PM
"[w]e should go after the uploaders and hosting servers. .."

Morally, the uploaders and hosting servers are the "enablers." Eliminate them and the casual infringer might become either a free-wanker or a porn buyer.

With bootleg full feature movies available free ? 99.9% will continue to be free-wankers.

gideongallery 11-24-2010 09:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redrob (Post 17726615)
We shouldn't go after the end users. We have enough PR problems without alienating our customers.

Most of the time I think we should go after the uploaders and hosting servers.

Just my opinion.
the uploader and the host are the only people with a guarrenteed fair use right

uploaders are using the swarm as a backup device
and the tracker are nothing more then the provider of that service

going after the downloaders is the right action, the problem is that you should actually have proof that they are guilty, real evidence that the person who you are accusing of downloading is actually the person downloading the content.

will76 11-24-2010 10:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamianJ (Post 17725998)
Who the fuck is WE?

I am in the UK.
Damn dude you can't even follow your own thread???? you started this thread and this entire thread has been about what Steve and his group have been doing in the US. You go on and fucking on about what is happening in the UK.... hence me saying, you do know that we are not in the UK.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DamianJ (Post 17722560)
Whilst Lightspeed et al boast about new business models sending threatening letters to people who pay the bill for an IP address, here in the UK, things aren't looking quite so rosy.
I don't think Steve et al give a fuck what is happening in the UK.

will76 11-24-2010 10:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redrob (Post 17726615)
We shouldn't go after the end users. We have enough PR problems without alienating our customers.

Most of the time I think we should go after the uploaders and hosting servers.

Just my opinion.
it's the go after the lowest hanging fruit approach. They wont dare sue any big sites because they know those sites likely make more than they do and they don't want a full blown battle in court where they might lose.

DamianJ 11-25-2010 03:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveLightspeed (Post 17726078)
DamianJ, why do you always sound like such a bitter cunt?
What a well reasoned counterpoint, Steve.

/me shakes his head

DamianJ 11-25-2010 03:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by will76 (Post 17726679)
Damn dude you can't even follow your own thread???? you started this thread and this entire thread has been about what Steve and his group have been doing in the US.
Reread it, hon. The thread is about the lawyers that worked in the UK sending blackmail letters to IP addresses.

There is a whole big wide world outside America you know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by will76 (Post 17726679)
... hence me saying, you do know that we are not in the UK.
There are people that read this board outside of America, hence me saying who the fuck are 'we'

Quote:
Originally Posted by will76 (Post 17726679)
I don't think Steve et al give a fuck what is happening in the UK.
Well he posted in the thread, calling me a cunt, so he is at least interested enough to read it.

I love being called names as a counterpoint. Really shows the other person has no intelligent argement to make and is resorting to name calling. Hilarious. Bless him.

Paul Markham 11-25-2010 04:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveLightspeed (Post 17726078)
DamianJ, why do you always sound like such a bitter cunt?
Hard to remain happy when you are a loser. Look at his marketing skills. :Oh crap

Paul Markham 11-25-2010 04:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by borked (Post 17725850)
Paul, adding live content, live chat, forums etc isn't what will survive above tubes - it's an idea granted, but I don't agree.

When there are sites delivering free HD content of 30+ minute clips, it's an impossible struggle to force a porn surfer to get out his credit card for something similar.

In your analogy of hamburgers - if you are offering a Big Mac with bacon and hot sauce and fries and a large cola for xx$ and just next door I can get a regular beefburger for free, same meat, same tase, no frills.... When I'm hungry, I know where I'll go.
Agreed. Selling the same old stuff that's being given away for free won't cut it in 2010. Even if it is in HD. That hasn't stopped the flow so far.

So what will be the extras we need to add to make more members come back?

IMO. Live content, live chat, forums, interactive will all help. Great content will also help and it has to be locked down. Plus more flexible join periods to suit individuals needs.

All this will cost money and the only place to get the extra money will be from the marketing budget. So the Catch22 is if you want a site with more chance of getting conversions and better retention, affiliates will have to accept a lower payout.

ottopottomouse 11-25-2010 05:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by will76 (Post 17724840)
mmmm no. Rochard's analogy is right. It is like the red light/speeding ticket cameras. The person who owns the car gets the ticket regardless who is driving.

The person who's name is on the internet access account and pays the bill obviously owns a computer. Just the same as the person who's name the car registered to own and pays the registration fees.

However, the camera stuff is getting challenged and has been removed in some areas.



There will be a picture of YOUR CAR not you. They can't make out from the picture who is driving. I know first hand. I've gotten tickets from someone else driving my car, and guess what I had to pay them and it wasn't me that was running the red light. Just like the picture proves the CAR was involved in breaking the law, the ip they collect proves that the computer/modem was used.
You obviously haven't got the forward facing Truvelo cameras yet then.

TheDoc 11-25-2010 06:13 AM
End of the day, blanket attacks will end up getting your ass nailed to the wall.... they always have and they always will.

And traffic cam wise, legally you do not have to pay it if it's not you driving. I've already gone through it.... the law's are very clear on this and only idiots would pay the bill.

Paul Markham 11-25-2010 06:42 AM
What those who are hoping the new law will fail don't seem to realise is the US Government won't stop there if it doesn't work.

The pirates are now clearly in their sites. Probably the big recording, programming, gaming and other companies are spending a lot of money lobbying the US Government to do something.

If people can't sue pirates, get their domain taken down or remove the Internet connection of serial downloaders or uploaders. Then a new law will come out.

The piracy lobby can't outdo the power of big business.

gideongallery 11-25-2010 07:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham (Post 17727238)
What those who are hoping the new law will fail don't seem to realise is the US Government won't stop there if it doesn't work.

The pirates are now clearly in their sites. Probably the big recording, programming, gaming and other companies are spending a lot of money lobbying the US Government to do something.

If people can't sue pirates, get their domain taken down or remove the Internet connection of serial downloaders or uploaders. Then a new law will come out.

The piracy lobby can't outdo the power of big business.
i love how you think the pirates have a lobby group

news flash paulie it groups like EFF that are defending all americans rights.

the same law that protect this industry protect peoples right to make the commentary "check yout quest crews best dance routine"

the safe harbor provision you guys are bitching about never existed in the proposed draft of the DMCA, it only got put in to balance the takedown notice power given to the copyright holder to protect the free speech/ fair use of the copyrighted content.

there is no way in hell that any law that is passed is not going to have a balancing clause, and with the current arguement being proposed (lose your copyright if you use those powers to abuse fair use) the "big business" is running scared.

Look at how many times people here complain about how "unfair" such a restriction is. As if you couldn't hire a lawyer, to adequately inform you of the potential fair use infringing liablity of attempted use of those powers. As if if they gave you patently bad advice you could sue them for malpractise.

the only people who would be fucked over by such a counter balancing proposal would be idiots who hire divorce lawyers to do their copyright work or hire qualified lawyers get the right advice and deliberately ignore it.

Barry-xlovecam 11-25-2010 07:56 AM
Quote:
RIAA trial verdict is in: jury finds Thomas liable for infringement
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...dict-is-in.ars

"[D]uluth, Minnesota ? After just four hours of deliberation and two days of testimony, a jury found that Jammie Thomas was liable for infringing the record labels' copyrights on all 24 the 24 recordings at issue in the case of Capitol Records v. Jammie Thomas. The jury awarded $9,250 in statutory damages per song, after finding that the infringement was "willful," out of a possible total of $150,000 per song. The grand total? $222,000 in damages. ...

... Defense closing arguments

Before the deliberations began, counsel for both parties presented their closing arguments. Thomas' attorney, Brian Toder, went first (per court rules). Speaking forcefully and only referring to his notes rarely, he took 15 minutes to make his points. He started off by repeating his assertion from the opening arguments that the defendant was in a "tough role" given what the jurors had heard and seen in the courtroom. "There are certainly alternative explanations, because my client didn't do it," he told the jury. "Someone used her name and IP address?it's not impossible." ..."
Plaintiff won ? the verdict has been retried and a similar verdict reached with some modification in the jury's award. Maybe, an appeal of the latest verdict ...


Quote:
The RIAA's latest victory over Jammie Thomas-Rasset

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/tech...as-rasset.html

"[November 5, 2010 | 6:14 pm

RIAA, file-sharing, piracy, Jammie Thomas-Rasset, Joel Tenenbaum Having been ordered by successive juries to pay the major record labels $222,000, $1.92 million and now $1.5 million for illegally sharing 24 songs, Jammie Thomas-Rasset exemplifies how both extreme and random these damage awards are. That's a consequence of Congress providing statutory damages that range from $200 (for an "innocent infringer") to $150,000 per infringement. As Ars Technica's Nate Anderson observed, jurors have no experience with damage awards, and thus have no clue what's reasonable in the grand scheme of things. ..."

This is in the US Courts and is a well known and argued case from moral viewpoint. It is important to note a few things;
1.) Her defense was that she was not the person using the IP ? she lost on that one.

2.)"[T]hat's a consequence of Congress providing statutory damages that range from $200 (for an "innocent infringer") to $150,000 per infringement. ..." She was accused of file sharing so she (her IP) was greater than an "innocent infringer."

3.) Her activities were not for some commercial gain (for some profit).

The traffic camera ticket issue cited above is still in motion;
Quote:
Civil District Court judge removes final hurdle to making city's traffic cameras operational again
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.s...judge_rem.html
Published: Tuesday, November 16, 2010, 10:15 AM

Note the name in the URL, civil_district_court_judge_rem i.e., in rem = against property (a vehicle in this case) but the Courts can identify the vehicle's owner so the owner is fined and the vehicle is not "arrested (read seized)." I am not arguing this as right or wrong and in some cases, I think this is excessive or even possibly unconstitutional.

The most important statement in all of this is;

"[T]hat's a consequence of Congress providing statutory damages that range from $200 (for an "innocent infringer") to $150,000 per infringement. ..."

Users that are downloading for their own personal use and not "file sharing" might end up with a judgment of $200 (for an "innocent infringer",) per title proven as downloaded.

Since for about $29.95 they could have had legal access and the right to download, if I were the "Emperor," I would treble the damages to 89.85 per claimant. Remember, this is for an "innocent infringer."

Paul Markham 11-25-2010 08:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery (Post 17727343)
i love how you think the pirates have a lobby group

news flash paulie it groups like EFF that are defending all americans rights.
You prove your stupidity if you think pirates can out lobby big business. It's all comes down to $$$ in the end.

The American Rights doesn't cover the right to break the law. Copyright infringement is breaking the civil law. Dream on if you think EFF can change that. Fair use is not what pirates are doing.

Robbie 11-25-2010 08:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent 488 (Post 17725344)
read what i wrote. this had already happened. domains were seized. they got a new one and the traffic followed. when the new domains are seized they will repeat it. use the google machine for further information. this is not hypothetical, this is how it has already played out.
I am unaware of ANY big site that had it's domain seized, got a new domain and new servers and then had their "traffic follow" Name one.

DamianJ 11-25-2010 08:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 17727391)
I am unaware of ANY big site that had it's domain seized, got a new domain and new servers and then had their "traffic follow" Name one.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/06/tv-shack-piracy/

DamianJ 11-25-2010 08:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham (Post 17726978)
Hard to remain happy when you are a loser. Look at his marketing skills. :Oh crap
Paul Markham, who begs for money on message boards, calls me a loser.

Awesome.

Tell you what, you and Lightspeed should try and explain exactly why you think suing an IP address is good, rather than just call me names.

I will start it off for you:

"I, Paul Markham, know that you can spoof an IP address. I know that open wifi exists. I know that grandparents have nephews that visit. I know that landlords pay the bill for internet access in rented accomodation. Bearing ALL that in mind, I think sending people threatening letters and boasting about how it intended to provide a new revenue stream and never actually go to court is a good idea because..."

Finish the sentence Paul. I dare you.

Agent 488 11-25-2010 08:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 17727391)
I am unaware of ANY big site that had it's domain seized, got a new domain and new servers and then had their "traffic follow" Name one.
some mainstream movie/tv sites did. google it. not familiar with the sites personally but read a few articles about it. i'm not your research assistant.

DWB 11-25-2010 08:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamianJ (Post 17722560)
Us Brits pioneered this idea of sending blackmail letters to people who pay for an IP address that may or may not have infringed copyright. Davenport Lyons did it years ago. And the two people behind it went to the recently famous ACS Law. And now they are in a shit load of trouble.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11...ort_lyons_sra/
If all you Brits were not criminals and hooligans, this abuse would not have happened in the first place. You people are almost as bad as Nigerians. :2 cents:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan (Post 17723946)
If you lend your car to a friend and he speeds and you get a ticket, do you have to pay the fine?

If your car is stolen and they speed then return it to you and you get a ticket, do you have to pay the fine? Will you if it is hard to prove it was stolen from you for a few hours?

Honest questions here. Do not know how it works in us law.
In some cities if you are caught picking up a prostitute in ANYONE'S car, they confiscate the car. Doesn't matter if I'm driving your car, mine, or a rental. It's gone. Then they put your name and photo in the paper.

The speeding ticket issue would apply for the auto-ticket machines. They take a photo of your number plate and mail you the ticket. The owner of the car is the responsibly party.

If there is an analogy to be used, it would be that one.

Paul Markham 11-25-2010 09:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamianJ (Post 17727413)
Paul Markham, who begs for money on message boards, calls me a loser.
So lets make 2 lists and compare.

You live in a rented small grotty flat in a house split into two.
You're 40ish and not got a mortgage or ever likely to get one.
You're single.
You're working in an industry that's on it's way down.
You're CV will show 8-10 years working in the porn business and a string of jobs.
You're odds on getting a job in marketing are slim at best.
Your sites are;
http://www.adultmarketing.co.uk
http://www.pornbeer.com
http://www.damianjennings.com
Your work is here. http://vimeo.com/user2552989/videos
You advertise here.
http://www.magician-directory.com/Ma...ast-Sussex.htm

http://www.paulmarkham.com/temp/damian6.jpg
Shows a site that's a blank page. How do you get bookings? Just interested.

I live in a house I own, with Eva.
I'm happily married with a great daughter.
I'm a cancer survivor, which lifts me up all the time. :)
Have another daughter and two grandchildren.
I'm 60 and retired.
Everything is paid for so all profits from the business, run by Eva, are spending money.
My sites are;
http://www.paulmarkham.com
http://www.bargainbasementcontent.com
http://www.paulmarkhamteens.com
http://www.astral-blue.com

And we still make money from magazine sales. Though haven't shot for over 2 years.

I made a joke thread asking for money to pay for glasses, you're to foolish to see that. Or just too depressed. If you think I'm short of $1,000 you must be thinking of yourself.


Bye, bye. Off to the shops. To buy more Xmas presents.

DamianJ 11-25-2010 09:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham (Post 17727509)
So lets make 2 lists and compare.
I really honestly hope when I retire, I find better things to do that repeatedly get trolled on message boards. Took me mentioning the glasses three times to get you to bite, but bite you ALWAYS do. Thanks for never failing to be predictable.



xoxoxo

PS Awesome side stepping again!

"I, Paul Markham, think suing IP addresses is a good idea because..."

Go on Paulie, you can do it, justify the blackmail. Oh wait, you can't so you attack me personally instead.

Brilliant. Name calling rather than counterpoint. So intelligent. Such a persuasive argument. I take it you didn't do well at debates at school?

"Markham, now present why you think Capitalism is good"
"Capitalism is good because my opponent lives in a rented flat and he has nothing on one of his domains! And he does magic! What a loser! LOL"

xoxoxo

stocktrader23 11-25-2010 09:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 17727391)
I am unaware of ANY big site that had it's domain seized, got a new domain and new servers and then had their "traffic follow" Name one.
Dude, I know you say you have me on ignore but maybe someone will quote this for you.

Piracy is growing daily. Shutting down websites has not and will not help anything. That mainstream board you hate, guess what the top 10 affiliate programs are over there? File hosting that pays per download. There is one thread with 9,000 replies and hundreds of thousands of views compared to the 40 views a normal business thread gets.

These fucks upload movies, list them on their movie sites and get paid for the number of downloads. They upload gigs and gigs and gigs and gigs of shit at a time and the filehost helps them out with fast connections and the tools to do so. With this setup the file host is absolutely not responsible for the content of the files, it's not even close to being against the law. As long as they follow DMCA (USA) they will not die.

This also offsets the big piracy to thousands of little fuckhead Indians and other foreigners from broke shitholes that just don't care. Since these people already have their sites up it takes them a collective few minutes to change all the links and make a new file host the go to choice. They already do this when one pays better, they can do it when one gets closed.

Agent 488 11-25-2010 09:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stocktrader23 (Post 17727616)
Dude, I know you say you have me on ignore but maybe someone will quote this for you.

Piracy is growing daily. Shutting down websites has not and will not help anything. That mainstream board you hate, guess what the top 10 affiliate programs are over there? File hosting that pays per download. There is one thread with 9,000 replies and hundreds of thousands of views compared to the 40 views a normal business thread gets.

These fucks upload movies, list them on their movie sites and get paid for the number of downloads. They upload gigs and gigs and gigs and gigs of shit at a time and the filehost helps them out with fast connections and the tools to do so. With this setup the file host is absolutely not responsible for the content of the files, it's not even close to being against the law. As long as they follow DMCA (USA) they will not die.

This also offsets the big piracy to thousands of little fuckhead Indians and other foreigners from broke shitholes that just don't care. Since these people already have their sites up it takes them a collective few minutes to change all the links and make a new file host the go to choice. They already do this when one pays better, they can do it when one gets closed.
you are officially on ignore.

Agent 488 11-25-2010 09:47 AM
where do you think all the porn board sig whores went? they are all posting hotfile links all over the place.

will76 11-25-2010 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamianJ (Post 17726945)
Reread it, hon. The thread is about the lawyers that worked in the UK sending blackmail letters to IP addresses.

There is a whole big wide world outside America you know.



There are people that read this board outside of America, hence me saying who the fuck are 'we'



Well he posted in the thread, calling me a cunt, so he is at least interested enough to read it.

I love being called names as a counterpoint. Really shows the other person has no intelligent argement to make and is resorting to name calling. Hilarious. Bless him.
Why are you acting so dense on this. You are bitching about what "Steve et al" is doing and how it doesn't work / isn't allowed in the UK. So what the hell does that matter to "Us" (we) over here in the US? Obviously you have to know what ever the UK laws are that it doesn't mean shit over here in the US.

and yes, I do know there are people outside of the US on this board. :upsidedow


You and Gideon should go have dinner together.

will76 11-25-2010 10:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopottomouse (Post 17727023)
You obviously haven't got the forward facing Truvelo cameras yet then.
lol, no. All they get is an up close shot of your plate and a wide angle shot from the back showing your car going through the intersection with the light red. You can't even see the person driving it much less make out their gender or race. And even worst you can't fight it, you are guilty. period. There is no defense, you can go to court and say "its not me" and they don't give a fuck, you pay or YOU get hit with late fees etc.

CurrentlySober 11-25-2010 10:03 AM
i like suing

stocktrader23 11-25-2010 10:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent 488 (Post 17727633)
where do you think all the porn board sig whores went? they are all posting hotfile links all over the place.
:1orglaugh

Rochard 11-25-2010 10:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan (Post 17723946)
Rochard,

If you lend your car to a friend and he speeds and you get a ticket, do you have to pay the fine?

If your car is stolen and they speed then return it to you and you get a ticket, do you have to pay the fine? Will you if it is hard to prove it was stolen from you for a few hours?

Honest questions here. Do not know how it works in us law.
Generally speaking in the US if you get a ticket it means you speak directly to the police officer, and they check your ID.

If it's a photo ticket, you get the ticket in the mail. Again, at that point, you either pay the fine or show up in court and prove it wasn't you. Same thing with a parking ticket. If your friend drives your car into the city and gets a parking ticket, you get the ticket in the mail afterwards. Again, either pay the fine or prove it wasn't you - and good luck proving it wasn't you.

It's no different than with someone downloading content. Someone using a computer as this IP address that traces back to your house downloaded content illegally without paying for it, and someone is responsable - most likely the owner of the computer or maybe even the person who pays the cable connection.

It's just like finding drugs in your house. If the cops raid my house and find a stash of drugs and I can't tell them who it belongs to, they arrest the owner of your house.

ottopottomouse 11-25-2010 10:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham (Post 17727509)
I live in a house I own, with Eva.
What are house prices like there?

And try not to start your reply with something about trolling as it's turning into a constant flow of telling Damian he lives in a hovel but I have no idea how Czech compares to see whether you are correct or not.

Rochard 11-25-2010 10:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamianJ (Post 17724101)
Of course it is. What is your point?



In order to 'legally sue' someone you need proof a crime has been committed, right? In the UK that is how it goes.

What is the proof of your little video game people infringed copyright? I have a feeling you're suggesting an IP address.

You do know an IP address isn't proof, right?

You understand how it could be unsecured wifi, so it could be a neighbour. It could be someone's nephew. Could be a rented building where the landlord pays for the internet. Could be a spoofed IP. Could be a printer's IP.

So sadly, you cannot sue an IP address.
Your the biggest fucking idiot on this board. Of course you can sue based on IP address. An IP is clearly proof - it says "someone from this location at this date at this time hit this server and illegally downloaded this content".

Was it possible that it was a neighbor or someone else hacking into a wifi connection? It sure is. But at the end of the day the person who owns / leases that IP address is responsable for what happens on it. If my kid downloads ten thousand songs illegally using my connection and my computer, I'm responsable for it.

It's like being caught with drugs in my house. If the cops raid my house, and find drugs, they arrest me because it's my house. It could be that the drugs wasn't mine and I had no idea they were there - but I'm the one going to jail. If I believe I'm innocent at that point, I go to court to prove it.

No different than an IP address. You can be sued for it, and then it's up to you pay the fine or prove them wrong in court.

My god, the fucking entry level in this industry is set very low.

Rochard 11-25-2010 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham (Post 17727509)
So lets make 2 lists and compare.

You live in a rented small grotty flat in a house split into two.
You're 40ish and not got a mortgage or ever likely to get one.
You're single.
You're working in an industry that's on it's way down.
You're CV will show 8-10 years working in the porn business and a string of jobs.
You're odds on getting a job in marketing are slim at best.
Your sites are;
http://www.adultmarketing.co.uk
http://www.pornbeer.com
http://www.damianjennings.com
Your work is here. http://vimeo.com/user2552989/videos
You advertise here.
http://www.magician-directory.com/Ma...ast-Sussex.htm

http://www.paulmarkham.com/temp/damian6.jpg
Shows a site that's a blank page. How do you get bookings? Just interested.

I live in a house I own, with Eva.
I'm happily married with a great daughter.
I'm a cancer survivor, which lifts me up all the time. :)
Have another daughter and two grandchildren.
I'm 60 and retired.
Everything is paid for so all profits from the business, run by Eva, are spending money.
My sites are;
http://www.paulmarkham.com
http://www.bargainbasementcontent.com
http://www.paulmarkhamteens.com
http://www.astral-blue.com

And we still make money from magazine sales. Though haven't shot for over 2 years.

I made a joke thread asking for money to pay for glasses, you're to foolish to see that. Or just too depressed. If you think I'm short of $1,000 you must be thinking of yourself.


Bye, bye. Off to the shops. To buy more Xmas presents.
Are you telling me that he's a fucking magician?

That explains so much....

Paul Markham 11-25-2010 11:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamianJ (Post 17727556)
I really honestly hope when I retire, I find better things to do that repeatedly get trolled on message boards.
When you retire you'll be living in a State owned flat, on a State pension and what ever else the State can provide.

Quote:
Name calling rather than counterpoint.
And calling Eva a "Bought Wife" or looks like a "Manwife" isn't name calling.

I pointed out the difference between you and me. Are you saying with all your knowledge of how the Internet works you only managed to get as far as you have? Either your knowledge means fuck all or you're not as bright as you make out. :1orglaugh

Paul Markham 11-25-2010 12:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamianJ (Post 17727556)
"I, Paul Markham, think suing IP addresses is a good idea because..."
I think suing pirates is great because it teaches them the consequences of their actions.


Quote:
"Markham, now present why you think Capitalism is good"
"Capitalism is good because my opponent lives in a rented flat and he has nothing on one of his domains! And he does magic! What a loser! LOL"
I think Capitalism is great because it allows people like me without any decent education, left school at 14. To reach the heights I have reached.

Not a great height compared to some. But at least I can still look down and see you. :1orglaugh

How do people book you for magic via a page that doesn't work? I wish I had found that link earlier and done a screen grab.

Elegant, entertaining and magical. Describes Damian down to a T. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

stocktrader23 11-25-2010 12:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 17727798)
Your the biggest fucking idiot on this board. Of course you can sue based on IP address. An IP is clearly proof - it says "someone from this location at this date at this time hit this server and illegally downloaded this content".

Was it possible that it was a neighbor or someone else hacking into a wifi connection? It sure is. But at the end of the day the person who owns / leases that IP address is responsable for what happens on it. If my kid downloads ten thousand songs illegally using my connection and my computer, I'm responsable for it.

It's like being caught with drugs in my house. If the cops raid my house, and find drugs, they arrest me because it's my house. It could be that the drugs wasn't mine and I had no idea they were there - but I'm the one going to jail. If I believe I'm innocent at that point, I go to court to prove it.

No different than an IP address. You can be sued for it, and then it's up to you pay the fine or prove them wrong in court.

My god, the fucking entry level in this industry is set very low.
Dude, you are pulling this shit out of your ass. No, you are not responsible for it in the same way. For starters, these people are being sued for SHARING files, nobody is getting sued for downloading them.

You can not sue someone and win for doing something without proving that they actually did it. This is why NOBODY has been found guilty yet.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060727/1131227.shtml


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:17 AM.
Page 2 of 5 < 1 2 345 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc