In any case, if you want to seed torrents from the EU, just make sure the source of the content come from the US.

Because, low and behold copyright is international and so you should be targeted, but guess what, it's too hard to get addresses from IPs from a non-national company (well, as easy just more expensive), - the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

i wonder the same thing, but ip location is used to secure cp prosecutions every day.

Yes, but that is just used to corroborate something when applied with more pertinent evidence. 1+2+3+4+5=15, not 5=15

5=15 is the entire case in all these letters...

i am poor at math. : ( just throwing that out there.

lol
 

Yo mamma so fat, she played pool with the planets:pimp

Well, at least it's a valid argument for staying in the other camp. You are forgiven (so long as I never meet you in a jury that presides on this*)


(*civil case I know never happen.)

This is the problem vast majority of the problem. It sucks but unfortunately those who chose the anti-piracy route are fighting an uphill battle. Things are stacked against you. The only solution available is to innovate and provide better value to potential customers. Tube sites are currently doing that.

If you want to compete, focus on higher quality content, more relevant content, and make the user experience easier for them. If you provide something tube sites don't then you will get some customers. If you don't then why would you expect otherwise?

We have and had a bank account. You obviously never read the threads properly. When Eva had her accident she was in a coma for 10 day. It was then that I found out she was the one with the power to take money out of the bank to pay ppeople like our staff, studio rent, servers, etc.

So I asked on the boards if anyone wanted to buy content I was open to any deal. Wasn't begging for charity.

Stop and read for a couple of minutes to why I live here.

In our market, the magazines, every once in a while a girl like Jana Cova turns up. These girls are a goldmine for a shooter like us. Each single set of a girl like this is easily worth $3,000. Without second rights, EU, AU and Japan sales. Shoot 10 and do the maths. $30,000 from the initial sales in the US and UK.

Driving back and forth to Czech we risk someone else getting that great girls and the $30,000 for 5 days work. Living here we don't need to rely on agents, we find our own girls before the agents get them.

In my last 10 years in England 4 girls turned up of that level. Of my last 10 years shooting here 2 a year turned up. Do the maths. Add all the other girls who turn up. Even on a good casting in Prague we could shoot 10 Readers Wives" sets that make $400 each. $4,000 from a casting. :thumbsup

Plus I have a Czech wife and her family. My Mother and Brother lived in the US. I have a daughter who I would prefer that she gets educated here and learns the values they have here in Czech. They're more polite and less aggressive than the UK. And they both want to live here. I have a family so have to consider their wishes.

Plus I actually like living here. Less crime, less aggravation, easier pace of life, people are friendlier and more polite. I like living here and to be honest don't want to come back to the UK except to visit.

But you can think what you like.

He is a magician, so that would be logical. :1orglaugh

Shit no wonder I'm happier here.

I did originally think he was buying the flat. Then found out via another poster on B&B that he only rented. Shocked me as I thought he could afford more. Obviously I was wrong.

I'm sure someone has corrected you already but downloading music will not make anyone get sued just like looking at an illegally shared image right here on GFY. If someone were so stupid to sue someone simply for downloading they would be laughed out of court.

The media doesn't report this shit right but as you can see from your article the 12 year old used Kazaa. By default, when you download a song it goes in a folder that lets others download it from you. They are not suing people for simply downloading just like they can't sue you for listening to the same song on a stolen YouTube video.

I think the IP address is used to secure a search warrant. The evidence is secured in the search. CP is criminal. Copyright is civil. Different rules and the police get involved in crimes like CP.

By the way Rochard, yes you can sue anyone you want in the USA. Want to know what you can't do though? Sue EVERYONE with just an IP address and shit for proof and get away with it for long. If you don't think they will clamp down on spamming lawsuit threats you are crazy. Also, the comments Steve has made here are enough to get him and his lawyer in a world of hurt. I'm still in schock that he had the balls to post details of his blame and shame campaign here, I assure you that a judge would not be pleased with it.

http://ask.metafilter.com/79838/Has-...nloading-music

Why are those that chose the anti-piracy route fighting an uphill battle? All I can infer from that is you say "fuck it, my content is going to get pirated but so what - I'll ship out better content in the members area so they'll come back". That really is a losing battle if so. Stop your content from being pirated in the first place, then you take your content out of the equation. Images notwithstanding.

If, and this is a purely hypothetical if, the entire industry never allowed downloadable videos. Where would the illegal tubes be?

This won't happen because of the same insecurity that exists - my competitor(s) allows downloads, so I have to. Maybe true. But the other side of the coin says - if my content is good, then I will only sell to people that only allow secured streams. Then your content becomes virtually valuable, since it isn't on the tubes. And who knows what that can bring - time (if given a chance) will only tell.

One more thing on download only lawsuits.

This is in regards to noncommercial copyright infringement.

"There are four essential elements required to prove felony copyright infringement: (1) that a registered copyright exists, (2) that the defendant infringed by reproduction or distribution of the copyrighted work, (3) that the defendant acted willfully and (4) that the works infringed were at least 10 copies of one or more copyrighted works with a total value of $2,500 within a 180-day period. Willfulness continues to be a very illusive concept, but the statute provides no definition. Case law illustrates that certain type of evidence generally is relevant to prove that defendant’s conduct was willful. For example, that the defendant had legal notice that conduct similar to his was infringement or that he had actual notice that his conduct was illegal."

http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/copy-corner66.htm

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.

actually there are, because the evidence collect doesn't provide proof of any other download but the one that was committed under the authority of the record company, they infer the other downloads (basically get them convicted of the download, and pump the damages based on the infered losses)

btw that one of the main reasons i know this is a precedent destroying case, and not a get the girl off case, they would have addressed this abuse a long time ago if they wanted this issue settled.

your mixing felony copyright infringement which is the criminal statutes and the civil liablities.

you might want to get a better lawyer, none of these lawsuits are criminal procecution, that section was designed for the guys making and selling counterfeit copies of dvd on the street corner.

Please clarify the first sentence. There are what?

Sir, for starters I don't need a lawyer for anything to do with copyright infringement.

That out of the way, I specifically quoted the part that is for noncommercial infringement. I did not want to paste a wall of text here but will do so now.

All the IP lawyers in this thread :1orglaugh

1. she lost
2. see 1

your using that case to argue that ip address is enough to identify the person as the infringer.

from a case where they clearly did a lot more than use her ip address to identifier

that like saying we should convict people on charges on murder if they own blue cars because cops were able to catch a murder who drove a blue car after doing all the investigation to successfully prove he commited the crime.

from the transcript your ignoring.

there is 23 pages of testimony going over how the ip address was assigned to a computer connected directly to the modem.

someone would have had to break in to the house and login as jamie and do the downloading for it to be someone else doing it.

like i said if this was intended to get her off they would have dropped that arguement and gone instead to the fair use arguements.

this is about knocking down legal precedents and keeping the appeals processes alive.

nothing within this case justifies the arguement that identifying the ip address is enough to find/accuse them of being guilty.

it a catch 22 but you need to violate/have someone give up their privacy rights to be able to get the proof.

as borked pointed out

which is the point i am making your using a case where they did all the ungodly amount of research, had a women self violate her privacy rights by handing over the computer to be analysed.

it no where close to pay up because we got your ip address blackmail letter being sent out by the lawyers.

I thought the users were sued. Not their IP.

gideon and stockbroker should go start their own firm. :2 cents:

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/leag...x430-25721.jpg

Excellent start to presenting your, I am sure, brilliantly thought out reply. Let's see how you justify your approval of this quasi-blackmail...

(Btw, when calling someone a fucking idiot, make sure you don't make really elementary grammar mistakes. You're/your isn't hard.)

It sounds like you actually believe that, which is sweet.

Rochard here are four reasons you are horribly, painfully wrong:

1) spoofing IP addresses
2) open wifi
3) relatives/friends coming over and borrowing your wifi
4) landlord including cable as part of house rental to 6 students

Most important thing, however, is that not a single case has ever gone to court. And they never will. Lightspeed and ACS Law both boast that going to court isn't the endgame. That cash is.

This is NOTHING to do with stopping copyright infringement, it is about making money.

But Rochard, you brainiac you, why has a SINGLE case never ever gone to court? I will tell you. The people that challenge the quasi-blackmail letters never get taken to court! All they do is write a letter back saying FUCK YOU SUE ME. And that is the end of it.

This has been going on for YEARS in the UK. Not a single case in court. Ever. Been going on for some time in the US, a very letigious country, and not a single court case.

Just have a THINK before you post.


Yeah some people actually throw their toys out of the pram and say they will never ever post on a forum again and then come back pretending to forget they ever said that. Can you imagine!

That isn't what we are talking about. We are talking about suing IP addresses. If you could sue pirates with proof I would be right with you. But you can't. And it doesn't teach them a lesson, because no case has gone to court.

Because damianjennings.com isn't my magic booking site, love. Another mystery solved.

PLEASE explain why you think me getting paid to do magic will embarrass me. Please. I am just so darn curious about what you think is shameful about it?

Careful. Someone will put you on ignore and flounce off to boast elsewhere :upsidedow

Bit early for cases to go to court. But cases of copyright infringement for music have gone to court and the results are in the thread. The accused is welcome to choose the court route anytime they wish.


So why does the domain appear in the advert? Time to update the advert.

I never said doing magic for money should embarrass you. You're saying that. I just showed everyone the advert and the site that doesn't work.

Of course the http://www.pornbeer.com site works and shows so much about you. :1orglaugh

Such an elegant, entertaining, magical and not cheesy guy. :1orglaugh

Jesus Christ Paul. That is for UPLOADING.

I know you are old. But surely you can see the difference between uploading and downloading?

There isn't one case that Davenport Lyons or ACS brought that has gone to court in 5 years. Isn't that enough time?

The lawyers are now facing a hearing which will probably lead to them being disbarred. That is the point.

Your opinion on the matter is moot. The people that decide whether lawyers can practise law think it is bad. That, Sir, is the point here.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...-lawyering.ars

Because it is a free listing on a directory, not a paid advert. No need to update it as it didn't give me any traffic. I didn't even know it was still there. I don't spend much time stalking myself.

I have another site I get my magic bookings from. As I keep telling you. Although your quasi-concern is lovely.

Why do you keep posting about it then?

Thanks! You're a sweety!

You bump constantly bump my threads and give me more external links. Cheers gramps!

PS Up for the challenge about landing pages I keep posting and you keep pretending not to read like a massive coward?

So post it here, or not up to the challenge?

I told you about the landing page idea. I'm waiting for you to show us the site that has a forum that doesn't have images until a surfer gives an email address. A fake forum of course that encourages the surfer to post and is initially trying to get the surfer to sign ups to a site.

Did I explain it right?

What challenge? Sorry your stalking skills are so bad you can't find it yourself.


No Paul, not that idea. We've all moved on from that. You think I am bad at landing pages, let's have a challenge. (This is the fourth time I've posted this here I think). We both make a landing page for a site using the same content. We split test it using google site optimiser. The person who makes the worst converting lander has to pay a grand to charity of choice of the winner.

Up for it? Or will you pretend not to see this. Again.

Anyway, back to the thread.

Please explain why you think suing IP addresses without having proof a crime happened is good.

Go on. I double dare you.

Seems to me like they are doing it - over thirty thousand times. Using an IP address they can establish guilt (or the assumption of guilt) and sue everyone they "believe" who illegally downloaded content. Out of thirty thousand cases, only two failed to settle out of court.

Your thinking "all they had was an IP address". The truth is that they sued the file sharing services and got IP addresses plus matching account info. Chances are they can match up an IP to the name, address, and email account of the end user.

Rochard used to be lighspeed's bitch keep that in mind. explains a lot. must still have to use him as a reference.

Exactly - maybe the dude is afraid of the mail he may be getting from you?

Your missing the point here. Your thinking they only have an IP address. They have so much more than that. They have an account at a file sharing service, they have their name, their address, their email address, and whatever other information required to get an account at one of the file sharing services. The IP address isn't the only thing they have, but instead the final nail in the coffin.

Or maybe it doesn't exist. I'm sure no one here thinks that. :1orglaugh

I have no idea how to make a landing page, not a designer and never pretended to be one. I just know enough about marketing to recognise a shit idea in marketing.

Where did I say it was good to sue an IP address?

Go find it I double dare you. Not sure you can sue an IP address. Is it possible?

Probably spot on. But I doubt if many here can put up their hands and say they have never downloaded something that wasn't pirated. And don't fear getting a letter. Damian knows lots about how to hide an IP address.

pual why do you always bully damien on the internets? serious question.

Are you bipolar? Serious question.

One day you start a thread calling me a pirate.
The next day you start a thread apologising for calling me a pirate. (and everyone lolled at you)
And now you post in a thread insinuating I am a pirate again.

Fucking funny stuff.

Love you

xoxo

i mean paul. i think reading dvtime's posts has made me dyslexic.

Damian should go work for Piratebay's PR department.

*You're

*You're


Who is THEY Rochard, my love?

This thread is about ACS: Law's lawyers facing a hearing for sending out letters to IP address owners for torrenting files. They certainly had no proof aside from a IP address. That is what I take issue with. As it isn't proof.

Thanks for playing though. You're sweet.

That's right Paul! It doesn't exist! You've rumbled me!

Right, I just assumed as you post so much about how to market a site you would be up for the challenge. I will lend you a designer. You just come up with the idea. How does that sound?

Or are you still too scared?

Oh gosh. YOu are teh funny today Paulie!

Really amusing stuff. Thanks for the bumps!

So you think it is BAD to sue an IP address?

You u-turn more than slutboat. People made more money before the internet. People made more money after the internet. Sending letters is good. Sending letters is bad. Is it your meds or were you always like this?

Brilliant fun today, gramps.

Because he started the slagging match and I can give as good as I get. He's now the grammar policeman on GFY. :1orglaugh

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Yes, because running PR for the world's largest torrent site is just like pointing out that suing IP addresses is abhorrent.

Come to Vegas, I am bringing buttons with DAMIAN IS AN COCKSUCKER on. You, slutboat, Rochard and Old Man Markham can each have one. It will be SUPER AWESOME!!!!111oneoneone

No you can't.

You post saying I live in a rented hovel.
You post saying I am a magician.

And I don't care about either of those things.

That's it.

That really isn't anywhere near as good as you get.

Not even the same ballpark.

But it's sweet you try. Keeps you off the streets.

xoxox