Judge dismisses movie piracy case based on IP address

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: Judge dismisses movie piracy case based on IP address
Read the full article here: http://www.myce.com/news/judge-dismisses-movie-piracy-case-base-ip-address-79770/

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Must not be as big a box office draw as before and had to find some way of publicizing the movie.


#3

The shame of being shown that you had downloaded that Turd should be punishment enough.


#4

The number of open non-encrypted wi-fi networks around in my neighborhood would suggest IP alone is a poor evidence.
In my experience, I can stop my car just about anywhere and open my laptop to find one.

Sure, they ought to secure their network, no doubt about that, but fact is they don’t. Because of it, they should have to mach contents and computer to have a case at all, given the matched computer is in the household.

At least in my country, I would be able to crush their argument in court if IP was all they got.
There are a number of reasons why a network could end up ‘Open’ even if it was encrypted. A power outtake or manual reset can cause that and I would be hard pressed to say the owner should have known better as his computer may be set up to connect to any (not just encrypted) WiFi networks and so unless paying special attention, the user has internet and does not need to notice the encryption is gone.

Even if the network is encrypted, kids have friends visiting who hook up various digital ‘stuff’ they bring to the WiFi network, neighbors may be able to hack it and so on. There are probably even more reasons here, but it all points to IP having less credibility as evidence.


#5

Broken link in the OP


#6

CDan, are you using Chrome? I can use the link in the story with Firefox, IE and Edge with no issues, but can’t make Chrome work with it at all.


#7

Worked in older version of Chrome 51.0.2704.103 M
Worked with update to 51.0.2704.106 M

I don’t usually use Chrome so it had to update


#8

Yes, its working now for me in Chrome, but I have no idea what was going on before.


#9

Maybe Google was testing something.


#10

[QUOTE=Kerry56;2776957]CDan, are you using Chrome? I can use the link in the story with Firefox, IE and Edge with no issues, but can’t make Chrome work with it at all.[/QUOTE]

It was a dead link, I swear, honest, really…
5 min later it wasn’t, I assumed someone fixed it here. :confused:
Talking about the TorrentFreak link in the article.


#11

[QUOTE=Xercus;2776954]The number of open non-encrypted wi-fi networks around in my neighborhood would suggest IP alone is a poor evidence.
In my experience, I can stop my car just about anywhere and open my laptop to find one.

Sure, they ought to secure their network, no doubt about that, but fact is they don’t. Because of it, they should have to mach contents and computer to have a case at all, given the matched computer is in the household.

At least in my country, I would be able to crush their argument in court if IP was all they got.
There are a number of reasons why a network could end up ‘Open’ even if it was encrypted. A power outtake or manual reset can cause that and I would be hard pressed to say the owner should have known better as his computer may be set up to connect to any (not just encrypted) WiFi networks and so unless paying special attention, the user has internet and does not need to notice the encryption is gone.

Even if the network is encrypted, kids have friends visiting who hook up various digital ‘stuff’ they bring to the WiFi network, neighbors may be able to hack it and so on. There are probably even more reasons here, but it all points to IP having less credibility as evidence.[/QUOTE] All I have to say is 2 words

Admin
Admin
That should get you into at least 10 routers on each block.;):bigsmile:


#12

Also, what if the foster home was also a middle man? If Gonzales were running a VPN, proxy, or TOR relay, perhaps to protect the privacy of those in the home by making it more difficult to distinguish between the residents’ traffic, and third-party traffic, then clearly and IP address is not sufficient to prove much of anything.