Judge: An IP Address Is NOT A Person

Status
Not open for further replies.

mister g

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2010
60
0
18,580
0
I suddenly had hope for the US Justice System! This has got to be one of the smarter rulings in recent years, Cheers!
 

techguy911

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2007
251
0
18,940
2
The judge is right im a computer tech with my own business i get dozens of people a week that are infected with a trojan proxy which can allow other users to download files using your ip most current av's don't pick them up due to the rootkit hiding them.
 

NuclearShadow

Distinguished
Sep 20, 2007
670
0
18,940
1
Sadly I do not see all courts doing this as well. You would have to be blind to not see the biased towards big business over the common man when it comes to American courts. In-fact in this certain case it may simply be because its the porn industry instead of a more powerful one. There has been no doubt cases of completely innocent people being sued by the RIAA or MPAA and winning without actually proving guilt and of course even the innocent cannot adequately defend themselves as they do not have the financial means to so settling despite being innocent is cheaper. It's obvious that they also do not care if they sue innocent people.

The laws and courts are simply not only biased but lenient on corporations as well. Take BP as a example. BP has more reported safety violations on record than every other oil company combined. The maximum amount they can be fined for such is $100,000 which is often cheaper to pay than to actually fix the problem so they pay the fine and never fix the risk.
The BP oil disaster devastated the ecosystem, the economies that relied on the area, and killed 11 people. All because of the known neglect of safety that BP is known for.
Just looking at the deaths alone that is at-least 11 counts of manslaughter or perhaps more fitting negligent homicide. BP executives made the choices to ignore known problems yet not one is jailed. Yet under any conditions if this was a common individuals action that lead to the death of 11 people they likely would never leave prison alive.

Its our duty to make sure the law remains fair, just, and uncorrupted. It's our duty to elect the right people for the jobs to make those laws therefor it is our fault that things have become this way. You have the power to stop this.

With that I get off my soap-box.
 

bardia

Distinguished
Jan 19, 2007
39
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]Sadly I do not see all courts doing this as well. You would have to be blind to not see the biased towards big business over the common man when it comes to American courts. [/quote]

Apparently I'm blind. Courts tend to be more biased towards the "common man." The laws may be biased against the common man at times, so a court impartially applying the law may appear that way, but if you complain about it, you really don't understand how our system works, or the fact that the court would be in the wrong to change that. If you don't like it, appeal to congress.


In-fact in this certain case it may simply be because its the porn industry instead of a more powerful one. There has been no doubt cases of completely innocent people being sued by the RIAA or MPAA and winning without actually proving guilt
Typically, you do not need to "prove" anything in tort. Only preponderance of the evidence.

and of course even the innocent cannot adequately defend themselves as they do not have the financial means to so settling despite being innocent is cheaper. It's obvious that they also do not care if they sue innocent people.
Yes that's true of course. That's why court's often allow these sort of cases to be done on contingency basis.

The laws and courts are simply not only biased but lenient on corporations as well.
This statement has no meaning. The laws and the courts are two very different things. I agree, sometimes the laws are biased towards corporations, sometimes they are not. Courts usually are biased against them.

Take BP as a example. BP has more reported safety violations on record than every other oil company combined. The maximum amount they can be fined for such is $100,000 which is often cheaper to pay than to actually fix the problem so they pay the fine and never fix the risk. The BP oil disaster devastated the ecosystem, the economies that relied on the area, and killed 11 people. All because of the known neglect of safety that BP is known for. Just looking at the deaths alone that is at-least 11 counts of manslaughter or perhaps more fitting negligent homicide. BP executives made the choices to ignore known problems yet not one is jailed. Yet under any conditions if this was a common individuals action that lead to the death of 11 people they likely would never leave prison alive.Its our duty to make sure the law remains fair, just, and uncorrupted. It's our duty to elect the right people for the jobs to make those laws therefor it is our fault that things have become this way. You have the power to stop this.With that I get off my soap-box.
This is pretty much pure bullcrap and demonstrates a gross misunderstanding of the law. Neglecting maintainable is typically the textbook case of civil negligence, you need criminal negligence to rise to the level of manslaughter. This sort of thing almost never makes it there.

Thanks for reading.

-B
 

memadmax

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2011
538
0
18,940
3
The people that are going after torrent sharing are LAZY....

While it is EASY to go after some pimple faced college boy who's downloading the latest screener off of TPB, it's HARD to go after the person who put the stuff on the torrent sites in the first place!

Which is who they really need to go after......
 

jednx01

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2008
139
0
18,640
1
This is actually a fairly smart choice. I agree with the courts on this one... I don't even download stuff illegally.
 

slothy89

Distinguished
Jan 9, 2011
19
0
18,560
0
[citation][nom]zachary k[/nom]That's not right, an IP address represents you like a name. Lets hope a higher court corrects this.[/citation]This is not true, as was stated in the article:
[citation[nom]Article[/nom]"The infringer might be the subscriber, someone in the subscriber’s household, a visitor with her laptop, a neighbor, or someone parked on the street at any given moment,” Judge Baker wrote in his ruling last Friday.[/citation]Add in the fact that many ISP's give standard residential customers Dynamic IPs, meaning that today you might have 123.45.67.89, but tomorrow you'll have 200.30.40.50, and someone else totally unrelated now has 123.45.67.89.

I think this ruling is fair. In order to pin someone as the culprit you need more than just an IP. MAC address would be a good start, as that should be unique.
 
G

Guest

Guest
What I find most disturbing is these corporations will break the law, in an attempt to show someone is breaking the law ( sharing files ) and most people think thats ok.
 

slothy89

Distinguished
Jan 9, 2011
19
0
18,560
0
[citation][nom]zachary k[/nom]That's not right, an IP address represents you like a name. Lets hope a higher court corrects this.[/citation]This is not true, as was stated in the article:[citation][nom]Article[/nom]"The infringer might be the subscriber, someone in the subscriber’s household, a visitor with her laptop, a neighbor, or someone parked on the street at any given moment,” Judge Baker wrote in his ruling last Friday.[/citation]Add in the fact that many ISP's give standard residential customers Dynamic IPs, meaning that today you might have 123.45.67.89, but tomorrow you'll have 200.30.40.50, and someone else totally unrelated now has 123.45.67.89.
I think this ruling is fair. In order to pin someone as the culprit you need more than just an IP. MAC address would be a good start, as that should be unique.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
G Streaming Video & TVs 11
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 18
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 23
G Streaming Video & TVs 38
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 27
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 29
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 46
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 12
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 53
G Streaming Video & TVs 35
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 33
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 37
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 32
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 64
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 37
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 24
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 69
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 68
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 45
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 49

ASK THE COMMUNITY