Apparently no one has informed the Pakastan courts that there is these new inventions called "encryption" and "proxy servers". As a side note, when the hell did we let a third rate country such as this have the internets? This is just proof they're not ready yet people! Get with the program!
Last I checked a strike is generated when a rights holder complains that "your" IP downloaded protected material from them to your ISP. Not when you just merely "connect to a peer and start downloading".
Secondly, you can easily run your torrent client through a proxy thus not providing them with your IP but that of the proxy.
Thirdly, I think "limiting yourself" in the article refers to NOT downloading copyrighted material therefore not being in danger of being accused of doing so. Although as we all know just not doing so doesn't stop the blackmail threats from the greedy lawyers, guilty or innocent.
Encryption doesn't help with anything other than not allowing your ISP to throttle your p2p traffic since they don't know that's what it is.
Re: Why overlook the obvious? This is South Carolina, you know.
Care to share where you live so we can make fun of all the stupid people there? As we all know there is plenty of stupid to go around as is evidenced by your trolltastic post.
Re: Re: Verizon soon to follow, and hopefully no others
You should be careful about any provider's "unlimited" data plans considering all of the press in the past about those so called unlimited plans being limited in the terms of service to 5GB per month. Maybe it's different now but I know in the past this was the case from multiple providers (Verizon and T-Mobile are the two that come to mind).
Agreed with the Helmet, you could take the complaints about this towing company and apply them to about 90% of the towing companies out there. They're all just a scam, robbing regular people on a daily basis.
Under the assumption the money was charged to you via your bank debit card, just call the bank and deny the charges. Tell them you did not authorize, sent the product back and they refuse to work with you. Your bank will reverse the charges and get your money back to you. Same goes for any credit card. Not sure if it was a direct withdrawal from your checking account if it works the same way but just call the bank and talk to them.
What law does the plaintiff think has been violated?
False advertising comes to mind. You can't advertise your product can do something and then change it so the product can't do that after the customer bought it.
On the post: Down Goes Another One: Spanish Appeals Court Rules Against Movie Studio Lawsuit Against File Sharing Site
On the post: Huge Victory: Court Rules For YouTube Against Viacom
Re:
FINALLY, SOME GOOD NEWS AND COMMON SENSE COMES OUT OF OUR GOVERNMENT!!!
Hate to be a joy kill but even a broken clock is right twice a day.
On the post: Pakistan Orders Internet Ban On Google, Yahoo, Bing, Hotmail, YouTube, Amazon & MSN
On the post: Canadian Heritage Minister Denies Calling His Critics On Copyright Bill 'Extreme Radicals'; Video Proves He Said It
On the post: Lieberman Clarifies That He's Not Really Giving Obama An Internet Kill Switch
Re: IMHO...
On the post: ISP Tries To Charge Users To Block File Sharing... Ends Up Installing Malware That Exposes Private Info
Re: Does encryption help?
Last I checked a strike is generated when a rights holder complains that "your" IP downloaded protected material from them to your ISP. Not when you just merely "connect to a peer and start downloading".
Secondly, you can easily run your torrent client through a proxy thus not providing them with your IP but that of the proxy.
Thirdly, I think "limiting yourself" in the article refers to NOT downloading copyrighted material therefore not being in danger of being accused of doing so. Although as we all know just not doing so doesn't stop the blackmail threats from the greedy lawyers, guilty or innocent.
Encryption doesn't help with anything other than not allowing your ISP to throttle your p2p traffic since they don't know that's what it is.
On the post: After 46 Years Of Unfulfilled Hype And Promises, Is Video Calling Finally Ready?
Re:
On the post: Red Flags Suggest Potential E-Voting Issues In Bizarre South Carolina Election
Re: Why overlook the obvious? This is South Carolina, you know.
On the post: AT&T No Longer Offering Unlimited Data Plan To New Customers
Re: Re: Verizon soon to follow, and hopefully no others
On the post: South African Politicians Want To Ban All Porn Online
Re: Porn???
On the post: Police Just Guessing When They Can't Clearly Read License Plate In Red Light Camera Photos
Re:
On the post: Towing Company Continues To Stand By Its Misplaced Lawsuit Against Angry Customer, Despite Losing Half Its Business
Re: Re:
On the post: Entertainment Industry Gets Politicians To Advertise File Sharing Sites
Re:
On the post: People Start Noticing That The Web Competes With iPad Apps
Re: Re: Re: Android ?
On the post: Bad Ideas: Hurt Locker Producers Preparing To Sue Tens Of Thousands Of File Sharers
Re:
I should have RTFA before asking.
After filing the lawsuits, the plaintiffs must subpoena ISP records in an effort to match IP addresses with illicit behavior on BitTorrent.
On the post: Bad Ideas: Hurt Locker Producers Preparing To Sue Tens Of Thousands Of File Sharers
On the post: Arizona Finally Dumps Speed Cameras
On the post: Did Video Professor Spend Too Much On Lawyers And Not Enough On Its Product?
Re: video professor thieves
On the post: Did Video Professor Spend Too Much On Lawyers And Not Enough On Its Product?
Re: The product?
On the post: As If On Cue, Sony Sued For Making PS3 Less Useful
Re: Legal Issues?
What law does the plaintiff think has been violated?
False advertising comes to mind. You can't advertise your product can do something and then change it so the product can't do that after the customer bought it.
Next >>