Do you think the police would have any credibility if they took evidence from a traffic camera that constantly spoofed the photos with random cars and plates?
A small tidbit: Perhaps you didn't mean to suggest so, but IP-spoofing does not work for two-way traffic such as file sharing. That would be like mailing a payment to a bootlegger for a copy of a DVD, but putting a fake return address on the envelope to evade detection by the authorities.
Sure, the authorities won't have your real address, but the bootlegger is going to have a hard time getting your DVD to you.
They gather all the evidence they can and present their case.
I guess my question is: What other evidence are they likely to have?
That is, if the IP itself doesn't prove it (and it doesn't), they would presumably have to come forward with some other evidence. As you say, the IP seems like the appropriate place to start an investigation, but saying that having an open router "is not a successful defense" against an infringement charge because there might be other evidence against you too strikes me as a "well, duh" argument.
I would think that having an open router would be a successful defense specifically against their IP address evidence. Any other evidence (e.g. a blog post about how you just grabbed the songs in question off the Pirate Bay) would obviously not be covered by an open router defense, but then, I don't think anyone has said it would.
It's up to the industry lawyers to prove that you were downloading infringing content. How can they do that if they can't tie the IP to you for certain?
When you say "it's not a successful defense", it sounds more like "it doesn't prove you didn't do it", which is true, but proving innocence isn't the way our system (nominally) should work.
You use this word . . . I do not think it means what you think it means . . .
Let's say you have a pile of gold. That's pretty valuable, right? Now let's say you pay $40 million to pour raw sewage all over that gold. When someone else points out that this seems like a colossal waste of cash without adding anything of value to your pile, do you respond with "No added value?? It's gold!"
It's pretty simple: Blizzard should stop leeching bandwidth and man up, put up enough servers, and just let people download directly. They are charging for their service, why use P2P?
I actually prefer P2P. If I were to download from Blizzard directly, my rate would be capped at whatever Blizzard decides to send me. However, I have a 40/10 connection at my house, so Blizzard isn't likely going to saturate that connection by themselves. On the other hand, with P2P I'm only capped by what I can get everyone else to send me in aggregate.
Eh, I'm not willing to say it's always a bad idea. Natural gas is a pretty important source of energy. Sure, we could reduce the amount we burn and use coal instead, but is that really better, in the end?
Don't forget, in your "net gain" calculation, you also have to take into account the money the labels spent on lawyers, which is no doubt astronomical.
I'm sure there are a some people who, after losing their Limewire, decided the easiest way to get their music in the short term was simply to buy it off iTunes/Amazon/etc, but the real question is, what happens when those same people discover the Pirate Bay or any other torrent site?
Now, you may ask "But who doesn't know about the Pirate Bay already in this day and age?", and I would counter "But who was still using Limewire in this day and age?"
Congrats on impeding the illicit music downloads of soccer moms everywhere; I'm sure things will turn around for the industry in a hurry if you can just crack down on illegal 8-track copying while you're at it.
Do you anontrolls ever get tired of this particular strawman?
Every single time someone points out the hypocrisy of the copy maximalists with a "Hey, I don't mind, but doesn't that go against everything you say you believe in?" some idiot rushes in here with a "I THOUGHT FREETARDS DIDN'T MIND LOLOLOLOL".
Seriously, can you connect even two neurons in your malformed brain and form some semblance of a rational thought before you hit the Submit button? Please? Do it for the children.
If the drug dealers continue to return, wouldn't it be good for the city to perhaps change the layout
Yes, the answer to having too many drug dealer on a city sidewalk is clear: change the sidewalk. Are you serious? You're really going to double down on that argument?
I swear, every time I think an anon-troll couldn't get any dumber, these guys rise to the occasion . . .
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I am finally starting to understand the appropriation argument
Fantastic post! The AC took an original work that came before and modified it slightly to make a completely different expression (which, paradoxically, entirely nullified the point he was trying to make about how minor changes can't change the fundamental expression.)
On the post: Gladwell Logic: There Was War Before Nuclear Bombs Existed, Thus Nukes Have No Impact On War
Re:
I don't know if you intended this as some kind of dig at TD, but if so, I wholeheartedly agree that the statement is fallacious.
I don't think anyone here thinks piracy has zero effect on music. For example, I think it has a decidedly positive effect!
On the post: Boston College Tells Students That Using A Wireless Router Is A Sign Of Copyright Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
A small tidbit: Perhaps you didn't mean to suggest so, but IP-spoofing does not work for two-way traffic such as file sharing. That would be like mailing a payment to a bootlegger for a copy of a DVD, but putting a fake return address on the envelope to evade detection by the authorities.
Sure, the authorities won't have your real address, but the bootlegger is going to have a hard time getting your DVD to you.
On the post: Boston College Tells Students That Using A Wireless Router Is A Sign Of Copyright Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I guess my question is: What other evidence are they likely to have?
That is, if the IP itself doesn't prove it (and it doesn't), they would presumably have to come forward with some other evidence. As you say, the IP seems like the appropriate place to start an investigation, but saying that having an open router "is not a successful defense" against an infringement charge because there might be other evidence against you too strikes me as a "well, duh" argument.
I would think that having an open router would be a successful defense specifically against their IP address evidence. Any other evidence (e.g. a blog post about how you just grabbed the songs in question off the Pirate Bay) would obviously not be covered by an open router defense, but then, I don't think anyone has said it would.
On the post: Boston College Tells Students That Using A Wireless Router Is A Sign Of Copyright Infringement
Re: The page got cut off a bit..
"BC, by law, is bound to videotape you in the shower to ensure that you do not sing."
On the post: Boston College Tells Students That Using A Wireless Router Is A Sign Of Copyright Infringement
Re: Re: Re:
It's up to the industry lawyers to prove that you were downloading infringing content. How can they do that if they can't tie the IP to you for certain?
When you say "it's not a successful defense", it sounds more like "it doesn't prove you didn't do it", which is true, but proving innocence isn't the way our system (nominally) should work.
On the post: The Emperor's New Paywall
Re: Added Value
You use this word . . . I do not think it means what you think it means . . .
Let's say you have a pile of gold. That's pretty valuable, right? Now let's say you pay $40 million to pour raw sewage all over that gold. When someone else points out that this seems like a colossal waste of cash without adding anything of value to your pile, do you respond with "No added value?? It's gold!"
On the post: Canadian ISP's Hamfisted Attempts To Throttle File Sharing Throttles World Of Warcraft Instead
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I actually prefer P2P. If I were to download from Blizzard directly, my rate would be capped at whatever Blizzard decides to send me. However, I have a 40/10 connection at my house, so Blizzard isn't likely going to saturate that connection by themselves. On the other hand, with P2P I'm only capped by what I can get everyone else to send me in aggregate.
I patch very quickly through Bittorrent. =)
On the post: DailyDirt: Playing With Technological Fire...
Re: Re:
On the post: Righthaven Dismisses Lawsuit Against Reporter; Still Seems Confused About The Whole Thing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You'll have to wait for a bit: He has to hear what Mike thinks first so he can argue the opposite.
On the post: Oprah Winfrey Not Guilty Of Copyright Infringement For Discussing America's Chubbiest President
Re:
On the post: Chris Dodd Memorizing Bogus MPAA Talking Points; Says File Sharing Ruins Community Bonding
Typo
I think you meant "wring". =)
On the post: Did Limewire Shutdown Increase Music Sales?
Re: Re: Boing
Don't forget, in your "net gain" calculation, you also have to take into account the money the labels spent on lawyers, which is no doubt astronomical.
On the post: Did Limewire Shutdown Increase Music Sales?
Long Term Gain or Short Term?
Now, you may ask "But who doesn't know about the Pirate Bay already in this day and age?", and I would counter "But who was still using Limewire in this day and age?"
Congrats on impeding the illicit music downloads of soccer moms everywhere; I'm sure things will turn around for the industry in a hurry if you can just crack down on illegal 8-track copying while you're at it.
On the post: You Would Think The Recording Industry's Main Magazine Wouldn't Copy Other's Works Without Permission
Re:
Every single time someone points out the hypocrisy of the copy maximalists with a "Hey, I don't mind, but doesn't that go against everything you say you believe in?" some idiot rushes in here with a "I THOUGHT FREETARDS DIDN'T MIND LOLOLOLOL".
Seriously, can you connect even two neurons in your malformed brain and form some semblance of a rational thought before you hit the Submit button? Please? Do it for the children.
On the post: Righthaven Sues Reporter Who Wrote About Righthaven For Including Image From Its Lawsuit
Re:
On the post: Righthaven Sues Reporter Who Wrote About Righthaven For Including Image From Its Lawsuit
Re:
On the post: Another Court Rejects Idea That DMCA Requires Proactive Approach From Service Providers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, the answer to having too many drug dealer on a city sidewalk is clear: change the sidewalk. Are you serious? You're really going to double down on that argument?
I swear, every time I think an anon-troll couldn't get any dumber, these guys rise to the occasion . . .
On the post: Do We Really Want Judges Determining What Art 'Says'?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I am finally starting to understand the appropriation argument
Good eye!
On the post: Amazon Launches Digital Music Locker, Even As Legality Is Still In Question
Re:
On the post: Sometimes It's Better To Just Let People Copy Your Content Than Deal With Licensing
Re: ok to steal, but... = license
Next >>