Court Tells TorrentSpy It Needs To Spy On Users

from the but-why? dept

Mon, Jun 11th 2007 6:41am — Mike Masnick

Popular BitTorrent search engine TorrentSpy was told by a federal judge on May 29th that it needed to keep log files of user activity on its site, even if there was no business reason for it. TorrentSpy is nothing more than a specialized search engine, but the entertainment industry wants to paint it as something worse. This latest ruling comes out of a lawsuit between TorrentSpy and the MPAA over the legality of TorrentSpy's search engine. However, the ruling really is extraordinary in many ways. Rather than asking a company to hand over previous records, the court is actually asking TorrentSpy to purposely create new records that it has no need for and hand them over to a private party (the MPAA). What's worse is that this directly contradicts TorrentSpy's own privacy policy -- so obeying the court order would open them up additional legal trouble. TorrentSpy hasn't started spying on users and is appealing the ruling instead (and its lawyer suggests the site would sooner shut down than follow the court order). Hopefully, the appeals court will recognize that requiring a site to specifically create new records (in violation of its own policies) and then handing them over to another entity in an ongoing trial is not a good idea.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

46 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ric, 11 Jun 2007 @ 7:10am

The ruling
Well, at worst they shut down before the judge can rule against them. Correct me if I am wrong, but can't you dissolve a business during a lawsuit if there isn't a dollar value attached to the suit?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shawn, 11 Jun 2007 @ 7:10am

Idiotic lawyers...
It is plain to see that the judges and lawyers in this case are just as idiotic as the person posting as "me" above...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 7:20am

The judge is an idiot
She's considering RAM as stored memory and therefore constitutes as evidence and needs to be handed over as a report.

Chaos will ensue if this holds. Requiring a company to keep record of their RAM is retarded.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nutjob, 11 Jun 2007 @ 7:35am

BS
Wait a minute, didn't Bush get assailed over doing the same thing? Apparently, Terrorists have more freedom then citizens.Someone needs to make up their mind; do we monitor peoples activity or not. A bit of equality would be nice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The infamous Joe, 11 Jun 2007 @ 7:45am

Story
RIAA: Judge, we don't have the evidence we need to win the case. By the way, we found a new car lying about, we left it in your driveway.

Judge: Hmm.. well, the only logical thing for me to do is have TorrentSpy gather evidence for you, to help you win your case. I shall decree it!

RIAA: The keys are in the visor.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DontpileonMe, 11 Jun 2007 @ 8:13am

No Story Here
Quote from Mike

"However, the ruling really is extraordinary in many ways. Rather than asking a company to hand over previous records, the court is actually asking TorrentSpy to purposely create new records that it has no need for and hand them over to a private party (the MPAA). What's worse is that this directly contradicts TorrentSpy's own privacy policy -- so obeying the court order would open them up additional legal trouble."

Mike you are seriously limited in your knowledge of the law. This is not extraordinary- it is called and investigation or discovery. And all the time information is handed over to a "private party". All the time the courts compel me as an employer to divulge confidential payroll information about my employees for lawsuits like divorces, car crashes and lost wages, etc (all private parties). A judge can ask for old info and also require future info to be tracked and reported that I don't currently track. Heck, a judge can even supeona me and not pay me as an expert witness to testify about things like "likelyhood of continuing and ongoing employment".

Secondly, if TorrentSpy has a privacy agreement that says if will never divulge any future or past info to the courts than it is an illegal agreement and cannot be enforced. And furthermore, if a court orders me or TorrentSpy to do something like this there is no further liability to me from following the court order.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 8:17am

It should also be noted that Torrentspy is based in the Netherland, so like in the Spamhaus case, the US has no real jurisdiction over them. Why Torrentspy even allowed this suit to go forward in a US court is something I still don't understand (perhaps someone can explain). As far as I can tel, the best I think the court could do in this case is threatened to have them blocked in the US (and Torrentspy would likely just block US site rather than shut down totally) or perhaps try to get ICANN to revoke their domain name (and they'd just move and set up shop on another domain), and then hope they could find a Netherland or EU court sympathetic to the MPAA cause to help enforce the edict.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dutch one, 11 Jun 2007 @ 8:26am

not likely
I know that the dutch court isn't filled with the most capable people when you look at technology. But i do know that the MPAA or the RIAA won't have a chance here to get those files.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
deefish, 11 Jun 2007 @ 8:31am

OMG! Those silly clowns at the RIAA/MPAA. They only want the Log Files so they can congratulate all the users.

Congrats!! Your being sued!

(Click here for BuyOut Option: $1500, Paypall accepted)
Respectfully, RIAA/MPAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
anotherperson, 11 Jun 2007 @ 8:38am

Re: No Story Here
HAHA! You just contradicted yourself in the second paragraph. I agree with the person that posted below you, also, it isn't being handed over to the courts, the courts are ordering it be handed over to another private party, which is perfectly within the bounds of the law to have in their privacy poilcy. I think you probably just work for the MPAA and are trying to get everyone on your side...and failing miserably.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Can you say communism?, 11 Jun 2007 @ 8:45am

Big Brother
The court is "asking" a company to break its own policies, so the goverment can "spy" even more on its own citizens. Is this part of the patriot act? Think about this quote everytime an amendment is attached to the constitution or the constitution is changed, "A Great Civilization is destroyed from within, not from without".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The infamous Joe, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:01am

It's worse.
The court is "asking" a company to break its own policies, so the goverment[sic] can "spy" even more on its own citizens.

No, the court is doing it so a *private entity* can spy on US citizens. That's *far* worse.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sanguine Dream, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:08am

Then maybe...
This sounds like an attempt to go on a fishing expedition.

The court is "asking" a company to break its own policies, so the goverment can "spy" even more on its own citizens.

What really scares me is that the court isn't doing this so the government (that is scary enough) can spy TorrentSpy users, the court is doing this so that a non-government organiztion can spy on TorrentSpy users. And just what do you think the RIAA will do once they find out about this?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Larry Cuttill, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:09am

Stop buying movies and cd's
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Larry Cuttill, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:21am

Stop buying movies and cd's
Americans don't ban together and boycott so until we
do can't complain. I will NOT buy any movie or music cd
Both industries knew about the technology upcomming
neither did anything to protect their interests. They just
holler for new laws and lawsuits. They need to spend their money finding ways to protect their interests be responsible
to their clients. Stop making new laws and stop run around suing kids.
This is not the same America I grew up in
Its been bought and paid for by all these large fucking corporations and war mungers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Larry Cuttill, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:21am

Stop buying movies and cd's
Americans don't ban together and boycott so until we
do can't complain. I will NOT buy any movie or music cd
Both industries knew about the technology upcomming
neither did anything to protect their interests. They just
holler for new laws and lawsuits. They need to spend their money finding ways to protect their interests be responsible
to their clients. Stop making new laws and stop run around suing kids.
This is not the same America I grew up in
Its been bought and paid for by all these large fucking corporations and war mungers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ReallyEvilCanine, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:40am

Re: No Story Here
All the time the courts compel me as an employer to divulge confidential payroll information about my employees for lawsuits like divorces, car crashes and lost wages, etc (all private parties). A judge can ask for old info and also require future info to be tracked and reported that I don't currently track. Heck, a judge can even supeona me and not pay me as an expert witness to testify about things like "likelyhood of continuing and ongoing employment".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ReallyEvilCanine, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:49am

Re: No Story Here
Mike you are seriously limited in your knowledge of the law.
As are you, DontpileonMe.
All the time the courts compel me as an employer to divulge confidential payroll information about my employees for lawsuits like divorces, car crashes and lost wages, etc.
Because as the employer, you're party to the dispute in that you employ a person and can verify such confidential information. You could also send a secretary or HR person on your behalf as long as that person also has routine access to that information.
A judge can ask for old info and also require future info to be tracked and reported that I don't currently track.
He can ask but he'll have a hard time compelling you to do so simply at whim.
Heck, a judge can even supeona me and not pay me as an expert witness to testify about things like "likelyhood of continuing and ongoing employment".
Only if you're party to the case at hand. Otherwise Stallman and Lessing and a load of others would spend every waking moment testifying in courts around the US under subpoena.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:52am

The USA is a big country with nukes. The Netherlands is a little country. When push comes to shove, Hitler ran over the Netherlands like a hot knife through butter. When a US federal judge hands down a diktat then you'd better snap to attention and cooperate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sokol, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:55am

Re: No Story Here
Your argument is flawed, and I suggest re-reading the post. You do payroll and already collect the data. This is a case of no data being collected. To put it in terms for you, imagine the government coming to you and asking for detailed information on the shopping habbits of your employee's, or information on what they spend their pay on. Again information you would not keep track of.

~Sokol
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:55am

What Torrent Spy should do is conform to the judges order. Since the data in RAM is the information that's wanted then the RAM memory should be the only thing provided.

No additional "logs" should be created that make this information human readable. Since it has been declared that the information is in the memory "for about six hours" then perhaps Torret Spy only needs to copy the existing RAM as it is once every 3 to 4 hours with no formatting or filtering since the data in RAM isn't formatted or filtered. A straight memcopy should suffice.

If you have to comply with insane orders like this then you should comply to the fullest letter of the order.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 9:56am

Re: No Story Here
Too bad the user's aren't TorrentSpy's employee's. And depending on the contracts and laws of that state, an employer might not have to divulge that information. A company doesn't have to track their customer's and a judge shouldn't be allowed to make them do so.

Beyond that, telling someone that they need to keep a record of their RAM is purely ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The infamous Joe, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:18am

Hahaha.
Hitler ran over the Netherlands like a hot knife through butter.

I less than three mixed metaphors.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Da Truff, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:28am

Dowloading music is American as mom and apple pie. The only conceivable reason why the RIAA would want to stop this American pastime is because the RIAA is actually an al qaeda front operation.

I think a little water boarding of key RIAA execs in Gitmo would reveal the truth.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
reed, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:31am

Re: Big nukes, LOL
"The USA is a big country with nukes. The Netherlands is a little country. When push comes to shove, Hitler ran over the Netherlands like a hot knife through butter. "

I can see it now, MPA and the RIAA along with the DMCA will force our hand and make us start World War 3. Kill em all before they can copy our music and media!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
LawL, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:51am

Re:
yeah right... the US is gonna nuke them down... till they hand out their records...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 11:32am

Re: No Story Here
It would be more like if you ran a hotel and a judge ordered you to install video cameras in all the rooms and to start spying on all your customers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 11:32am

someone needs to tell the judge that information isn't "stored" in RAM the same way information is stored on a hard drive. Tell her to go back to elementary school when you learn about homonyms. Just because they both use the word "store" doesn't mean they mean the exact same thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 11:34am

Re:
It should also be noted that Torrentspy is based in the Netherland, so like in the Spamhaus case, the US has no real jurisdiction over them.
Hah. US law applies everywhere.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 11:45am

Re: Re:
yeah right... the US is gonna nuke them down... till they hand out their records...
They don't hafta nuke 'em. They just tell a few well placed Netherlands govt. officials "Gee, you know it'd be a real shame if you was to somehow disappear. By the way, have you heard the talk about our CIA having some kind of secret global prison system?"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul, 11 Jun 2007 @ 11:52am

the judge should be bitch slapped with an engineering degree
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 12:23pm

the judge should be bitch slapped with an engineering degree

True dat.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ehrichweiss, 11 Jun 2007 @ 12:30pm

Re: Re: No Story Here
"It would be more like if you ran a hotel and a judge ordered you to install video cameras in all the rooms and to start spying on all your customers."

And we have a WINNER!!!. Very good way of looking at this mess. Thanks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
GoblinJuice, 11 Jun 2007 @ 12:56pm

Re: It's worse.
I fear little brother more than big brother, to be honest.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ryan, 11 Jun 2007 @ 1:00pm

Its all pointless anyways
TorrentSpy isnt doing anything wrong in the first place, because its not against any law to index a site in a search system.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 2:36pm

Re:
I have an engineering degree. I wish I'd gone to law school instead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
discojohnson, 11 Jun 2007 @ 3:07pm

Re: Re: No Story Here
that would only work if it weren't illegal to put the cameras in there in the first place.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 3:37pm

Re: Re: Re: No Story Here
Illegal? The law means whatever the judge says it means.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 4:50pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: No Story Here
Law is what comes out of the barrel of a gun.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 5:47pm

I doubt that a US court could compel a Netherlands based
company to break Netherlands law or contracts without
some help from the Netherlands legal system.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
|333173|3|_||3, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:40pm

Forget an engineering degree or the the TorrentSpy privacy policy, she should have a lerge tome of EU law dropped on her head from a great hieght. TorrentSpy logs are under Dutch juristiction, and so EU law applies. I very much doubt that TorrentSpy is allowed to hand over thier RAM logs, or any otehr user data, to the US courts, and they are certainly not allowed to violate their privacy policy to hand over data to an US corporation. Hell, under EU law the restrictions on handing data over to a US arm of that same company are very restricitve, for privacy reasons.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
confused power, 18 Jun 2007 @ 6:39am

this seems odd??
ok first of all ram is random allocated memory how the hell can you report on something that is (correct me if im wrong) temp???? and will peeps in england be effected to the rule??
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Estufa1, 27 Aug 2007 @ 3:45am

U.S.Court ruling on TorrentSpy
I cannot believe that in this "free" country our government is trying to support private industry by taking away one of our most precious freedoms; that of using the airways to freely surf the internet. What are they thinking? Our legislature screams Freedoms of our Forefathers, yet at every turn, hits us with blatant theft of our basic freedoms. It wasn't bad enough they took away our freedom to spend our own hard earned money in our chosen ways by prohibiting offshore internet gambling, now they want to have us spied on by our own chosen search engines. Time to STOP this blatantly communistic activity. Let's bring back our government of, by, and for the people!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alfredo, 11 Sep 2007 @ 2:31pm

Question
I am scared. I used Torrentspy to download about 40-50 movies (most of them adult movies, I recognize it, although a few Holywood titles too). I was so careless that I used my own DSL conection with my own IP address. I live in New York.
Can anyone tell me if I am or will be in trouble?
Thanks for your help!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Captain Nemo, 18 Dec 2007 @ 7:11pm

Re: No Story Here
The agreement is not to gather it. If the agreement was to gather it but not hand it to courts, that would be illegal, sure. But that's not what they said at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Laendain (profile), 27 Jan 2021 @ 4:40am

Spying sometimes is legal
I can't even imagine that the company went for such a thing! But I how to track a straight talk phone without any problems and in a legal way!
[ link to this | view in thread ]