
Judge Says IP Address Doesn't Prove Anything in Piracy Case - JobBoardWPTheme
http://gizmodo.com/judge-says-ip-address-doesnt-prove-anything-in-piracy-c-1782752621?
======
sdoering
In Germany you, as the owner of a internet access point, are liable for
whatever some person does with this line.

It is called 'Störerhaftung'. That way it doesn't matter who exactly did
illegal you download stuff. You are liable non the less.

Funny thing though - the moment you are an incorporated ISP you do not fall
under this concept anymore.

That is by the way the reason free WiFi isn't that available in Germany.

~~~
davidiach
That's a really stupid law and it's one of the reasons why Germany is so far
behind when it comes to building great internet/tech startups.

~~~
rprospero
I'm just curious: are you arguing from that it's a stupid law from a moral
perspective or a pragmatic one? I might disagree with these policies
philosophically, but I've never seen evidence that they were anything but
ruthlessly efficient at achieving their desired ends.

~~~
lostcolony
I mean...if your desired end is to prevent free wifi availability nationwide
(and the various benefits that provides, access to information and job
listings and community and such), regardless of socio-economic strata, and to
ensure that any security issue (weak passwords, out of date firmware, a zero
day) makes an end user legally culpable, all to help protect a content
industry predominantly located outside your nation, then sure, chalk that up
as a success?

~~~
hx87
> to ensure that any security issue (weak passwords, out of date firmware, a
> zero day) makes an end user legally culpable

That might actually be a good idea.

~~~
mivv
Yeah so that my Grandma who had Comcast install her router should definitely
be legally culpable when there is a firmware issue with the router, or when
the installer sets up a weak password (or none at all). I think you are
probably speaking from a tech support perspective where you have had to fix
systems that haven't been patched for years and that caused issues. Well, most
of the population would be screwed by laws like this thru no fault of their
own.

~~~
grb423
> Grandma ... should definitely be ... culpable

Not downvoting just suggesting that the sarcasm might detract from
comprehensibility for English learners. It detracts nothing from the point by
just saying plainly that she should not be.

------
yardie
I recently received one of these stupid letters. I asked everyone in our
household if they knew anything about it. No one did so I threw it in the
garbage. My wife asked if we should be worried, the wording was quite
threatening, basically asking us to go to their website and "ATONE!". We have
a large enough house with family and friends moving throughout it during the
day. Most have the wifi password. Because thats what everyone asks for these
days, after the initial greetings.

~~~
forgotpwtomain
There is a whole industry of sending these letters to people, most people feel
threatened and would rather pay the demanded compensation than have to fight
it, even if they were never involved in said infringement.

------
dfc

      > There’s no guarantee that judges across the
      > country will use the same standard, though.
    

This sentence could be misleading if you are not familiar with precedent in
the US court system. It's important to note that this is just a decision at
the lowest level federal court. There is no guarantee that _any_ judge,
including another case in the same district court, will apply the same
standard.

~~~
venomsnake
Don't federal judges tend to look sideways in the same and other circuits when
types of cases they don't have experience with are presented to them?

While not binding I think it is positive development.

~~~
dragonwriter
It's likely an unpublished (in the official reporter) decision, which often
courts do not allow to even be cited as persuasive precedent.

------
simbalion
"Hollywood hasn’t and definitely won’t stop making attempts to get money from
pirates who download their films and that’s fine. They have a right to protect
their property"

Do they? I'm not convinced. Why must we tolerate the behavior of corporations
which has proven to be harmful to our society? Their litigious actions also do
not improve our society or offer any benefits to the human race. I think a
strong argument can be made that they do not actually have a right to dictate
who sees their products or what they should pay for it.

~~~
rayalez
Society is made out of individuals. You want to live in a society that doesn't
screw individuals over, so that your own human rights wouldn't be violated.
Property rights are pretty fundamental as human rights go. Intellectual
property is a form of property. Therefore people(and companies) should have
the right to protect it.

> Their litigious actions also do not improve our society or offer any
> benefits to the human race. I think a strong argument can be made that they
> do not actually have a right to dictate who sees their products or what they
> should pay for it.

Imagine saying the same thing about any other kind of property, and you'll
realize that living in a world where people think like that would be
horrifying.

~~~
simbalion
Story-telling might be unique among intellectual property because it is often
used as a platform to express ideas of value to the society.

If a film has some idea that absolutely should be shared with everyone, you
can't ethically hold those ideas hostage, or offer '1st viewing' privileges to
those with the time or money to see that film in theaters, for an example.

Since it would be impossible to determine what ideas are of value and to which
persons they're of value to, I think the best answer is for hollywood to relax
their efforts. People aren't going to stop going to movies or stop buying
DVDs.

------
2close4comfort
DAMN STRAIGHT! Attribution is not as easy everyone thinks!

