What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
79 Comments
- snypa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+48Those RIAA bastards make me sick.
- compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+46They ignore the possibility and continue to badger the person for $3,500
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+43Wow... if an IP address is enough for preponderance of the evidence standard that is found in civil court, I wonder what the implications are for criminal cases.
(this is coming from someone who almost ended up with a felony record due to "computer" investigators failing to realize that telnet sessions are easily hijacked) - datastorageguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+40Umm what do they do when someone is using a proxy or routing the download through some zombie computer? Sort of like the grandma being sued for illegally downloading 50 Cent tunes...
- KraftyUA, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23"In criminal court, you're innocent until proven guilty. In civil court, you have to prove your innocence if you're sued."
In criminal it is beyond resonable doubt. In civil it is preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not. The Plantiff in a civil suit has to prove preponderance of the evidence. The defence still doesn't have to prove anything, they are still assumed to be innocent.
It is just a lower standard to meet to prove guilt in a civil suit. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18With the invent of Wireless networking and so many home users not knowing to secure their wireless network makes the IP argument much much less valid. If I was downloading a bunch of music I'd war drive till I find an unsecured Wireless Access Point and do it from them. Even if the owner notices, most people still don't know how to do anything about it, and if its just something your doing at night you can probably get away with doing it for months on end with no one knowing. Great thing to do to your enemy if they have an unsecured wireless...
- Andy.D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18If you RTA, you'll see that it's a follow-up with some more details and maybe a correction or two.
- RegisteredUser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16RIAA doesn't care. Either you pay the RIAA extortion fees, or you take the burden of proving your innocence. There were a couple of cases where the defendants proved that they didn't even own or use a computer. Once that was discovered and presented to the judge, RIAA dropped the case and moved on to the next victim.
I still cannot believe how RIAA's actions are not illegal. - iSEPIC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Home "secure" Wireless is EASILY broken anyways - additionally, in some cases, you don't even need to break the encryption to copy a song/movie/etc. - search for 'ping tunnel'.
- Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14It's time for all the Grandma's to start harrasment countersuits.
- dtreese, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17I don't like the tone of the article saying these people could PROVE that others had access to their IP address. The burden of proof isn't supposed to be on the defense. Oh, I forgot. In RIAA-land, your a pirate unless proven otherwise. What else should we expect from an industry of criminals who collude to jack up CD prices?
- maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13@iSEPIC
Actually, since this is a civil case, i don't think the RIAA has the right to file for a search warrent, since they are filing a complaint rather than pressing charges. In all the cases i've heard of i've never heard of any equipment being seized in a raid. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+20You're confusing criminal law with civil law.
In criminal court, you're innocent until proven guilty. In civil court, you have to prove your innocence if you're sued. - bi0metric, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9It is the RIAA / MPAA who lobby to make the copyright laws molded to ensure they stay rich. And it's the people who elect these idiots, so it's really OUR fault.
- datastorageguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@vandread
unless of course they get a list of the mac addresses with access and spoof one of them. - Andy.D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The "proving" comes when the people being screwed by the RIAA have to convince the RIAA that their limited evidence isn't enough, so that they drop the case. Like the article says, it's about the RIAA going after easy money.
- whitecricket, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Which is basically what the RIAA is influencing. War-Driving. If the only way they can track your D/L is via IP; we will most likely see those who are really "serious" about free downloads jumping around to unsecured access points with download managers to get these files.
- gh02t, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Insightful. I still don't think its right for the RIAA to be able to sue you if you had a open WAP. It is a legitimate defense that somebody else could have used your network, leaving little or no evidence, and I'm sure its happened to people.
It may not be a legal defense, but it would be wrong to be sued for something that there is significant reasonable doubt that it was somebody else.
And what about people using proxy servers? Are those proxies responsible? - DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"This argument is specious however, both for the fact that no ruling supporting that argumentation alone has been made as of yet, and because in both instances discussed above, the evidence of multiple computer users in the home was undeniable."
BUT! It's doubtful that the RIAA will want a decision on this particular line of defence because if they lose it's pretty much the end of the lawsuits. So it is still possible that threatening to use this defence will result in a dropped case. - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8No one is looking for the "get out of trouble" free card. They simply want to see people get rightfully convicted on real evidence rather than all this crap of, all the circumstantial evidence points to you, so we think it's you, and we're sueing you, but we could be wrong.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6You don't even need to wardrive to hop on someone's WiFi.
Someone can hook up a cantenna, yagi, or parabolic antenna to their laptop *IN THEIR HOME* and leech off neighbors up to a mile away.
There would be no indication of the source of the leeching, and the leecher could even have their own internet connection (which they only use for legit purposes).
The courts are completely out of touch with technical reality. - iSEPIC, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7So when the cops com knocking on your door to seize all of your electronic equipment, and accuse you of copying a song (or two), even though you didn't, maybe you too will have the knowledge that possibly someone else used your connection, matter it be your teenage neighbor stinging up a wire at 4-6am, or using your wireless, or even your phone line for a dial up - whatever - when you are put in that situation, you'll then see the light. Especially when they don't find any songs, AND THEY STILL CONTINUE TO SUE YOU DUE TO THE FACT YOUR IP ADDRESS MATCHED SOME LOG.
- straxus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Do you have a link to a story? Google and I can't find any mention of this. I would think this would be a widely publicized story in the Digg/Slashdot/Boingboing circles if this happened.
- GreatSunJester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4RIAA -- can you prove you did not simply have someone (using a little knowledge and easily available tools) access MY network and perform the downloads you are accusing me of?
Might be an interesting direction to follow.... - matts0344, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Its true, I live in the suburbs, not the city, and when my brother turns on his laptop hes got 4 or 5 different wireless networks he can log on to.
- Twango, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The point is that RIAA is suing left and right, and innocent people are being harassed. The question is how people can defend themselves against frivilous lawsuits.
Piracy isn't listening to a file, or a cassette mix. Piracy is destroying freedom to maximize profit. - Trevino, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4d) Get your home network raped by hackers.
- TheAnti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Since the RIAA just started to bully the ISPs to get what they want with threats of lawsuits for "aiding" the pirates.
The whole thing is just a big witch hunt, and unfortunately, like the witch hunts of old innocent people are getting dragged into it.
@mainblac
Because anyone thats smart enough wants to stay far away from the mess of politics. - IanPhillips, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Break a mac filter by just sniffing the network data, grab a mac address, spoof it and your on.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2> the last city I lived in had 327 attorneys listed in the phone book...
> you'd think it would be a little more affordable if maids, bug exterminators,
> and strippers are really much more scarce than attorneys.
The judicial-industrial complex is the only industry that creates it's own demand (well, besides advertising and maybe the military). Only as a lawyer can you take a typewriter/word processor and singlehandly "right" the "injustices" of the world and get paid for it simply by filing paperwork.
Hell, in some states, you don't even need to go to law school to be able to take the bar exam.
All you have to be able to do is parse sentences written what seems like a foreign language that nobody speaks (no, not Latin) and muddle a way through 100s of thousands of contradictory case rulings that comprise the body of "precedence".
It's a wonder that even *MORE* people aren't doing it! It's like free money, baby! ...except stupidity that fuels that entire process *does* grow from trees! - iSEPIC, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5You know, if only 1% of us would sue the RIAA (I mean you can sue anyone for any reason, right? I mean if the RIAA can sue us for any reason (in accordance with the article) why can't we bring them to civil suit too?) - We'd tie them up for a while, sue them for what? Racketeering. And NO CLASS ACTION!, do all individual suits.
- SirZRX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2well an ip is not an evidence, a year ago i was playing Ragnarok Online whit my 99 smith, someone dude whit the same isp here was botting some accounts, the game master summoned all the characters conected whit the same ip adress so me, 2 friends, the botter and his army of bots got banned, thats not fair cuz here in mexico a lot of people shares the same ip addrees. i well that his can be a familiar case for the RIAA.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If I were thusly sued, I'd hire a thug to "counsel" the RIAA lawyer. They are a mafia. They deserve mafia tactics.
- TheAnti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2First off, abortion is a choice that a woman should be allowed to make, I don't see how anyone thinks that they have the right to tell some one what to do with their body.
Secondly, we're talking about computer files, why do you need to bring up other arguments that have absolutely nothing to do with this. This is a serious problem because innocent people are being sued because the govt. is doing nothing to stop the RIAA. - kingyubba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2MAC addresses can be spoofed. someone could just input yours or bad addresses....
- shredswithpiks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2FTA:
"One last minor clarification. Regarding what the RIAA can and cannot sue you for, let's simply say this: the RIAA can launch a suit for just about any reason. One should not confuse the ability to sue people with the likelihood of prevailing. The RIAA can and will sue more people based on IP evidence. Whether they succeed is quite another matter."
Doesn't matter whether they can succeed, most people getting sued can't afford to front the court costs to even fight the damn suit so it doesn't matter whether the RIAA has a chance of previaling - the people lose. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The record industry is dying, and these legal actions are the last death throes.
- zemkacz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1riaa some stuff for u
- takeda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's relatively easy to overcome MAC filtering. Also WEP encryption is not a problem.
Of course you can make your wireless network relatively secure (WPA, IPSec etc :) but why do you expect home user to be an IT expert?
Ok WPA is good protection for home user, but many devices and some os'es still don't support it. Sometimes you're forced to downgrade to less secure encryption or turn it off.
Personally, I don't mind other people to use my network. I know sometimes it's really helpful, I was few times in situation when my connection didn't worked and I needed internet access... - zemkacz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1us pirates
- billybeer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1My understanding is that these cases are based solely upon IP address identification. I have not heard of cases proceeding to subpoena of computers and forensic analysis, or even depositions or anything else. (maybe someone has) Most people bail at the $2500.00. However, as discussed, IP goes to a computer and most computers have multiple users. I don't think the record folks will ever let one of these cases go to trial absent some sort of "confession". Even a "more likely than not" cannot be established with just an IP address where you have multiple users.
- GLSmyth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dugg - excellent article.
- 2obvious4you, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"That's so true, we need SMART officials, why can't any run for office." - maninblac1
http://vote.peteashdown.org/
I'm sure Pete has been dugg before. At least he knows the internet isn't a dump truck. - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Abortion is more serious says who!? Damn conservative/liberal pricks.....just leave people alone!
- kachink, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A very informative, objectively written article on a subject that is many times not handled that way. Dugg!
- freonchill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the joys of the judicial system.
1. party A sues party X*; goes to court
2. both parties decide to end suit
3. nothing legally changes, no precedents set
4. see 1.
*X is username, screenshot, IP, etc on a list of potential money towards party A for next to nothing; where next to nothing is the standard office cost of a laywer.
GOTTA LOVE THE LEGAL SYSTEM! - hellyes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm a college student in an apartment and at any time I can jump on to 3 or 4 networks other than mine. I guess I'll be running my downloads off my neighbors' connections from now on.
- covindesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1R I A A some things they don't understand is every product shipped with computers sold for etc... is well a considerable reason for piracy say your buddy has a CD, DVD, program etc... you don't want to go buy it just yet say or you like me and poor well burn the ***** onto a CD and burn it has now become yours for free. so I say why don't they just go through a list from every superstore or company with our names/recites and start suing us for buying a computer that comes with a burner, ripping programs, cdrs DVDs on and on and on. you know its kinda like the energizer bunny/ only they keep going and going but smack there heads into brick walls along the way please suck me off riaa oh yeah I'm also a musician that knows you really only make money at gigs more so than in stores off of your Cd's. plus If you supply yourself indie you make all profit minus a small percentage of recording costs meaning materials. one thing I think there pissed about is this is the way the industry is heading
self employed musicians that need no cooperate ass munching dingle berry eating ***** suckers. Please sue me biggggggggg RIAA please - hodyoaten, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The really depressing thing about this whole mess is the implication that lower- and middle-class America can no longer afford decent legal representation.
Why the hell are attorneys charging so damn much? The last city I lived in had 327 attorneys listed in the phone book... you'd think it would be a little more affordable if maids, bug exterminators, and strippers are really much more scarce than attorneys. - elroy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2these are civil cases, not criminal. they don't need to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. unless you can provide enough evidence to turn the tables in your favor (meaning that it is more than likely you didn't download the music) then you'll lose the case. merely showing the possibilty that it wasn't you isn't adequate.
-
Show 51 - 79 of 79 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is