TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

$7,000 Damages for Sharing a “For Dummies” Book on BitTorrent

A man and woman from New York have been ordered to pay $7,000 in damages for downloading a “For Dummies” eBook using BitTorrent. New York Federal Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered a default judgment against the pair for infringing the copyright and trademark of major book publisher John Wiley and Sons. The recent verdicts pale in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of dollars movie pirates had to pay last year.

for dummiesLate 2011 John Wiley and Sons became the first book publisher to go after BitTorrent users in the U.S.

In the months that followed Wiley filed more than a dozen mass BitTorrent lawsuits involving a few hundred John Doe defendants in total.

The Does are all accused of sharing digital copies of titles including “Hacking for Dummies,” “Wordpress for Dummies” and “Cooking Basics for Dummies.”

Wiley’s lawyer previously told TorrentFreak that their intention is to settle these cases with the alleged infringers for an undisclosed amount. However, more recently the book publisher also requested default judgments against those who failed to respond.

Two of these defendants were subjected to a default judgment yesterday by New York Federal Judge Laura Taylor Swain.

Tammy Roberts of Clifton Springs, New York, was sentenced for sharing “Photoshop CS5 All-In-One For Dummies” and Fred Burgos of Brooklyn, New York, for sharing “Herb Gardening For Dummies” on BitTorrent. Both have to pay a total of $7,000 in damages, the amount as requested by Wiley.

Interestingly, Wiley accused the BitTorrent users of both copyright and trademark violations. $5,000 of the damages were attributed to copyright infringement and the other $2,000 to trademark infringement.

According to the complaint Wiley is worried that pirated copies may damage the “For Dummies” brand as they may be of inferior quality or bundled with viruses.

“The damage to Wiley includes harm to its goodwill and reputation in the marketplace for which money cannot compensate. Wiley is particularly concerned that its trademarks are used in connection with unauthorized electronic products, which could contain malicious viruses,” it reads.

While the defendants certainly didn’t get off lightly, the damages awards against them pale in comparison to three other default judgments that were handed down in recent months. In Illinois three men had to pay $1.5 million each for sharing seven to ten movies using BitTorrent.

Despite the victory for Wiley it is uncertain whether the book publisher will continue to press action against BitTorrent users. Many of their mass BitTorrent lawsuits have been dismissed recently and Wiley hasn’t filed any new ones since September last year.

But then again, with the prospect of millions of dollars in settlements and default judgments, there are plenty of other copyright holders to fill that void.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • ralph

    VPN Service For Dummies

    • VPN

      What if they decrypt my VPN?

      • No

        Use your local “open” wifi.

      • guess

        They have to fight the vpn provider first. Or they might just ban your account, depends on who cares about dmca bullshit. They can’t decrypt your vpn lol.Shared ip services should be better.

        Check here to see if a vpn provider tolerates torrents or not. Connect to the vpn then go to that site.
        http://www.pobralem.pl/

        • Hm

          thanks for providing that link man, now I know that some one was UNLAWFULLY monitoring my activity months ago and now I can sue them.

        • Harry

          jeez you greedy losers will do anything to keep from paying musicians, actors and authors when you use their work.

        • Who

          @Harry: “greedy losers” WOW you got a lot of nerve to come up here and call some people greedy that may or may not have any money.

        • Guest

          @Harry: Yes, instead we should all just pay up more to those greedy conservative companies stuck in the pre-internet ages. You know, those who do everything to get more and more money.

          Learning about the practices of such companies and corporations, I’ve become more and more of a pirate. Before, I would make ‘honest’ purchases, but after learning these purchases are not all that honest for the artists themselves, I refuse to give any more cents to the powers that be. Instead, I look for the artist itself on the web to purchase directly from, and if that’s not possible, I pirate.

          Tl;dr: >Implying piracy is evil; >Doesn’t know who the true villains are

        • guess

          @Harry
          Some of us like to try before we buy or even already have the movie/music/game and want a backup the easy way by downloading.

        • A2in

          @harry The musicians, actors and authors all get paid for their work. They’ve not lost anything as they’ve been paid to produce the works for the corporations to flog on to the general public. I doubt that any of the middle men involved are paid based on number of sales, the only place it will hit are the shareholders or the fat cat bonuses. We’ve all seen the reports that even though there’s a “massive piracy problem” causing millions of dollars in “lost” sales these industries are making increasing profits year on year.
          And remember every download isn’t a lost sale, most probably wouldn’t have gone out to the shops/theatre and spent money if it wasn’t available. Others will go out an buy it because they think it’s worth it.
          Downloading’s a pay what you want business model, it’s just that you can only count everyone as a $0 sale because you can’t correlate a single download to a book sale, or a blu-ray box set sale, or even 5 theatre tickets!

        • Wallace

          Harry: We are not obligated to pay anyone for “using their work.” Failure to pay someone for “using their work” is not greed, not theft, not anything. Using someone’s work without paying them is perfectly moral and obviously 100 percent legal.

          I am “using the work” of anonymous people all over the world every time I drive a car, turn on a computer, or shower and dress myself.

          You are a psychopath.

        • Wallace

          Harry … note also that the good people of TF tried to have a rational discussion with you despite your limitations. They are the opposite of losers and extremely moral people.

        • ScrewEwe2

          @Harry, that was a very unkind thing to say, and you have really hurt my feelings deeply. In fact, I may sue you for emotional distress. I’m willing to settle out of court for $7,000.

          Bo Ng, esquire

        • chris_p_bacon

          @harry. nothing really, but knowing what you posted would command a response, i therefor do not respond to your comment, it is not worthy, and you know it

        • JordanKratz

          Thanks a lot for the link.I use a few of these to check IP.
          I also use a Firewall along with Boleh VPN.
          Have had no real bad issues at all.I am still considering myself a “Newbie” to VPN & IT Internet Type Stuff.
          But if you put me in the Edit Chair I will do wonders with Audio and Video Work and I will build/design great fast Computers.
          I should of learned Networking……….I had plenty of time to do it.
          I can bet there are plenty of others like me who know a lot of video,audio, and graphics, and hardware but not Networking/Linux/Tor/VPN , ETC Stuff.
          Can’t believe I am still Alive !!! And I am a Radical Original Punk Rocker 1976 but I am getting along in age.57 years old and still Rocking Out.

        • Guest

          Hmmmm…. one wonders the statue of limitations…

      • Guest

        Pray?

      • Anyone

        if they waste that much resources on you you should be proud

      • Seaman Spray

        Easy. Starbucks.

      • Eatmybark

        Your an idiot, know what you are doing and don’t post before you do.

      • joexxx

        You’re much more likely do die in an airplane accident than for ANYBODY to decrypt a standard VPN stream.

      • Rekrul

        What if they decrypt my VPN?

        Do you understand how VPNs work?

        They don’t hide your identity by just encrypting the data, they hide it by routing your connection through their servers.

        When you use file sharing software, your IP address is visible to everyone else who is downloading that same file. It has to be, otherwise nobody would know where to send the data in order to reach you. The only way to hide your IP address and still have the network function is to go through another system, so THAT address shows up instead.

        If you call Microsoft directly, they can see your phone number. But if you call a guy named Bob and have him call MS and relay your message to them and their responses to you, MS only sees Bob’s number. They have no idea who you are. Assuming that Bob wipes the caller ID information after you hang up, MS has no way to find out who was actually responsible for the call. They can show up at Bob’s house and demand to know who he placed the call for, but if he has no records, he can’t tell them.

        This is a slightly flawed example because the phone companies keep detailed records that can be searched, however things are a little different with the internet. If the VPN company doesn’t keep logs, there’s really no way to track down all the IP addresses that were connecting to them at any given time, much less match them up to the VPN’s outgoing connections.

        • JordanKratz

          This is just what I had to learn about in the last 6 or so weeks.I did some research and then I ordered Boleh VPN.
          I go on there every few days to read thru the posts on their Forum.
          I am learning a little at a time.
          Your post was very informative.VPN with no logs is what you want to do and it might not be wise to use a Company who is based in the USA.

    • Rick

      It seems that VPN is the only way to go anymore.

      When the word BitTorrent is used in this article I assume it means the protocol and not the client. Because if it is the client then why would anyone use the BitTorrent client, or the utorrent client since they are owned by BitTorrent, it seems to be reporting you?

      I happily use the internet instead of ‘For Dummies’ books for info and use tixati instead of Bittorrent or utorrent. I don’t think I’ll touch a ‘for dummies’ book ever again.

      • Anon

        i always wonder when an article mentions bittorrent what they mean, the protocol or the client. Sometimes it’s hard to tell because i suspect the article writer doesn’t know themselves.

        I so don’t trust bittorrent the client, or it’s ad filled brother utorrent.

        • Rekrul

          i always wonder when an article mentions bittorrent what they mean, the protocol or the client. Sometimes it’s hard to tell because i suspect the article writer doesn’t know themselves.

          I so don’t trust bittorrent the client, or it’s ad filled brother utorrent.

          Despite the paranoid claims about the BitTorrent client and uTorrent, there’s nothing special about them as far as monitoring copyright infringement. Your activity can be monitored no matter which BT client you use.

          Download a torrent and click on the Peers tabs. Congratulations, you’ve just monitored the IP addresses sharing that file.

        • tf don’t know ? yeah

          learn2context

        • Frankie098

          Err,you do know that you can turn off Adds in the latest utorrent,or,maybe you don’t.
          Besides there are lots of add blockers out there,now you can go back to your Trolling.

  • Guest

    No amount of fines or prison sentences will ever stop or reduce piracy.

    • ProGrasTiNation

      Yes but the coming war they have planned will,1984 is only a few years away

    • ProGrasTiNation

      Yes but the coming war they have planned will do the trick,1984 is not to far away!

  • Js

    I’m not in the USA but I will now never buy one of their books. The same aplies to others who have tried this SCAM.
    I have a memory of an Elephant !

    • marxmarv

      If you live in a country where their books are cheap, you should buy as many of their books as possible and then resell them to US residents. Show them what “free trade” is really all about.

      • They Suck

        They will sue you. See “KIRTSAENG v. JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC.”

        • They Suck
        • marxmarv

          I’m familiar with it. That’s why I suggested it. They would be unlikely to put more quarters into the whack-a-mole machine while SCOTUS is still deciding whether they get a hammer or not.

          I think they will opine in favor of Kirtsaeng, 5-4, with Kennedy or Kagan dissenting like a good corporate lackey and a surprise concurrence from someone on the Court’s right wing who has a proper 18th century appreciation for books to go with their proper 18th century constructionism.

      • Techanon

        Someone was acussed of copyrigt infingement already for doing just that. There was a TF article about it too.

      • ProGrasTiNation

        Actually giving them the books for free would teach them about true free trade.
        The world doesn’t need money anymore as it just enslaves us,creates crime & poverty,& is used by banks to keep countries in check.

        • marxmarv

          That wouldn’t exactly be “trade”, would it?

          The suggestion that the world doesn’t need money anymore is ludicrous. In fact, given the broad variety of goods available today and the fact that any given person may have use for at most a small fraction of a percent of them, the likelihood of successfully striking a good barter transaction with any random person is vanishingly small and some sort of abstract token of exchange is pretty much necessary to operate such a market. Even electron flows are finite, just like matter or enthalpy, and these things need to be rationed. The key is to ensure that the value and supply of money are managed to the benefit of the *public* good, not the good of the banks and the 1%.

    • Guest

      Nor will I. If they were worried about ‘harm to its goodwill and reputation’, well, they just earned some off me. I hope John Wiley and Sons go bust this year.
      As a lesson I suggest nobody uploads torrents of ANY of their catalogue.
      Let us see how they like the lack of free advertising, and see if their name doesn’t fall into obscurity.

      John Wiley and Sons – CONSIDER YOURSELVES BOYCOTTED.

      • guess

        You hear that motherfuckers. We won’t buy your shit.

        • Yearly

          Like you buy anything anyway, lol…

        • guess

          @Yearly
          I don’t buy crappy media.Especially dummies books, How to save money on how to books for dummies.

          Step 1
          Use google.
          The end.

          I have all of the fast & furious movies on dvds and some other dvds. For music i mainly use fm radio and youtube. I buy the most of my games new also.

        • bobmail

          You don’t buy anything anyway, child. At best, your parents buy stuff for you. Now sit down while the adults have a conversation.

        • Jimmy671

          @bobmail

          Hey bobby boy,I was wondering how long it would take you to pop out af your arse,to make some monkey brain comment.

    • CheeseThief

      Yeah.. I doubt you’d have ever bought a book from them anyway

      • guess

        Their books are shit, i have never read them and by the title of them you can tell they basically look everything up and re-phrase it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002639684444 Ryan Smith

    If anybody uploads a low quality photo of me you will be sued for harm to my goodwill and reputation in the marketplace for which money cannot compensate. Don’t even think about bundling me with a virus!

    • http://techfleece.com/ Richard Gailey

      We wouldn’t dare ;-) http://i.imgur.com/0IXGL.jpg

      No virus though

      • Guest

        It’s not possible to put a ‘virus’ inside of a image file.

        • Guest

          Sorry. I didn’t read “Don’t even think about bundling me with a virus!”

        • Donotemail

          Wrong. You can hide any binary data inside an image file. The effectiveness of including a virus binary data inside an image is questionable, though.

        • Jmorse43508

          Not true. Look up Windows Meta File Vulnerability. That was going around several years ago. You could get malware just from opening an image file that was compromised with the WMF exploit.

        • xpmule

          can you link me to a torrent for “Bundling Malware For Dummies” ?

        • xpmule

          Sure you can.. Its called an ADS stream.. you can bundle anything you want ;)

  • Ibod Catooga

    Ah my lawd I so just poopted my panticles. Yoj have no IDEA MAH NIGGA just none at all.

    Fukshiznit!

  • Ibod Catooga

    I have a memory of a Rutabaga!

    • Guest

      I have a memory of a Winnebago…nice girl.

      • 512

        I have 512K memory

        • BillGates

          You will never need more memory than that, well maybe 640K

  • Anonymous

    not even the Book Of Moses is worth $7000, so how the hell can a book from John Wiley and Sons be worth this amount? i dont believe it would have sold another $7000 worth of copies anyway!

    • 7000

      That’s why they need those $7000.

  • Who

    “infringing the copyright and trademark” Ummm HOW the FUCK is some one infringing on trademark rights by downloading?

    “Hacking for Dummies” Waaaaa? this book is illegal in the US LOL as hacking is.

    and since when does a book have a $7000 value on it?

    WOW unbelievable how FUCKING STUPID the US has become. and its only 4 days in to 2013.

    the end is NEIGH!!

    • guess

      These 2 people didn’t show up in court. So they won without a fight, these 2 people could be walking away with paying nothing

      • Who

        um…did you even read what I posted?

        • guess

          yes. The $7,000 could be less if they showed up.

          Two of these defendants were subjected to a default judgment yesterday by New York Federal Judge Laura Taylor Swain.

        • MadAsASnake

          Would have been zero if they had showed up. IP person.

        • Who

          @MadAsASnake: are you sure about that?

        • MadAsASnake

          IP person? Totally. 100%. All you need to do defend is say it was not you (which is probably true). Being the account holder is neither a crime nor a civil offense.

      • foff

        They already have walked away. I am sure they don’t live in this state and no law firm will throw much money at trying to collect this. The only stupid asses are the mafiaa or wiley and sons that paid the lawyers for a judgement I am sure they have no intent to collect.

    • Who

      @ guess: nope you didn’t read it @ all.

      “Ummm HOW the FUCK is some one infringing on trademark rights by downloading?”

      um… you can’t. to infringe on trademarks you must be using the trademarked symbol to your advantage. you can’t trademark names btw.

      BTW I was referring to what the judge stated.

    • Guest

      hacking IS legal.
      illegal breaching is illegal though

      don’t be an uneducated fool, please

  • Mogster

    The article says it was a “default judgement”… that means the defendants were supposed to appear in court but didn’t bother? Doesn’t sound very smart to me.

    • Guest

      Yep. Now you can be proven guilty of a crime (not just of failing to appear) without any evidence being brought against you. Yes indeed-dee-do, democratic ‘justice’ is as balanced as ever. I suppose it is the equivalent of being held in contempt. Pretty similar to what I feel for the judge. I can have my $7000 dollars please? In your own time.

      • http://twitter.com/DuckTheNWO ☠ NewWorldStoner ☠

        Yes it seems like corporations are able to produce figures out of thin air (not unlike money itself with the federal reserve etc.). The legal system is of course corrupt to the point that there is no such thing as a fair trial and no such thing as innocent until proven guilty, 2 fundamental principles. When people en-mass begin realize that these 2 principles are no longer upheld by the justice system, they will demand reform and failing that the system will fall.

        • marxmarv

          I wish. The masses seem plenty content with it, so long as it’s Other people getting boned harder than Their kind are.

          The presumption of innocence isn’t dead; it’s just unevenly distributed and requires an expensive lawyer.

        • guess

          When the fully anonymous encrypted filesharing programs are created that don’t sacrifice speed, they can render their monitoring tools worthless.

      • bobmail

        “now you can be proven guilty of a crime ”

        First off, it’s not a crime – it’s contract law / lawsuit. They weren’t found guilty, they were found liable, very different.

        Failure to appear is essentially to enter no defense. Pretty much every court for civil proceedings works in the same manner. They cannot allow people to blow things off and not accept their responsibilities. The alternative is to allow people to not appear and have every case stop, which would mean that all civil suits would be meaningless.

        It’s pretty basic if you stop and think it through (not something that is common on this site, sadly!)

        • Guest

          No, the alternative is for the court to run some basic fact-checking against the prosecution’s charges instead of handing them a default victory.

          Letting them automatically win just because the defendant didn’t show is in no way, shape, or form justice. It’s pretty bullshit if you stop and think it through.

        • bobmail

          “No, the alternative is for the court to run some basic fact-checking against the prosecution’s charges instead of handing them a default victory.”

          You have a basic misunderstanding of the court system. They are not investigators, they are not there to make your case for you. One side launches a civil suit, and you, the defendant must answer. If you fail to answer, the court assumes you don’t disagree with the assertions, and awards what the plaintiff asked for.

          It’s like a referee in sport. They aren’t going to stand in front of your net and goaltend because you are too lazy or too stupid to put a team on the field.

          “Letting them automatically win just because the defendant didn’t show is in no way, shape, or form justice.”

          it is exactly justice. If the defendants are so innocent, they can show up and refute the items in the lawsuit, one by one, and prove that they are not responsible or liable. Failure to do so is effectively agreeing with the plaintiff’s case.

          To have any other option would mean that every lawsuit in the world would be stopping tomorrow, just by having the defendants not show up. That would be pretty bullshit if you stop and think about it.

    • They Suck

      Vacating a Default Judgment for Dummies …

      A default judgment is a decision made in a court of law which finds a defendant guilty based on his failure to appear for a scheduled court date. When these are given out in a civil court, one which handles disputes between individual citizens, they are known as civil default judgments. Since the judgments are made by default, and the defendant is not given the chance to defend himself, one cannot technically appeal a default judgment. Rather, one must file a motion to set aside or vacate the default judgment and then appear at a scheduled retrial.

      • Christopher Kidwell

        Vacating a default judgement from someone who works in the legal arena: easier than you would think to do. Many judges look extremely leery on default judgments in any cases, even criminal ones, and so will per-forma set them aside immediately if someone appeals the decision.

        Even faster if the company in question cannot give evidence showing that the person in question was served with a notice.

        The bottom line is that we should ban default judgments in civil cases in the United States and even in criminal cases. There is too much of a ‘ability to fake the summons delivery’ in the system today.

    • MadAsASnake

      This is why these scams should be banned. They are all based on IP evidence which will never succeed in court. Don’t know about Wiley, but pretty much all of these I’ve seen look exactly like money grubbing scams and it is not surprising they are ignored. The other problem wit default judgments is there no way of knowing the defendant was actually served. If that is the case, getting the judgment set aside should be a pretty much given. If they can’t find them, then they get no money anyway…

      • Guest

        I wonder how the IP evidence will work in court now that we have got a copyright troll working here now in the UK.

        • MadAsASnake

          In front of Birss? Just about as well as it did for Crossley.

  • dondilly

    The sad part about this is that there is plenty of info online on the failings of ip address evidence and even copies of expert witness testimonies detailing its failings.

    Even for a default judgement, court papers must have been served and only the foolhardy would ignore them. It begs the question if papers were infact served and any judge worth their salt should ask for proof of service.

    It should come as no surprise that in many cases an ISPs user address records are prone to errors, the phone company finds you via phone number (to route data to the ISPs DSLAM) and they need your bank details for billing which uses post/zip code for verification not full address.

    If they send in bailiffs to recover the money, some poor sod down the road may be in for a shock.

    The truth is, as we saw with crossley, only to take those likely to get default judgements to court for propaganda purposes and gain leverage threatening others. Afterall the last thing they want is unreliable evidence kill their milch cow.

  • ScrewEwe2

    You have to be a damn dummy, to even want anything to do with any of Wiley’s “Dummies Books”.

  • Anonymous
    • guess

      “Share and download huge software and video files in minutes”

      Somebody call the mpaa and notify software creators. This company is profiting off of educating people on how to torrent.

      Would it be ironic if we used that guide to torrent the guide on a torrent site?

    • Guest

      It’s not ironic at all.
      It’s like I always said, the media companies put this plan in motion 10 years ago
      to flood the market with a simple means to encourage people to do this.
      What’s ten years on a time scale of (they want hold on to copyright) forever.
      This was an orchestrated plan. Do you think you can buy politians and judiciary overnight? Lol. Wake up you morons. This is a charted attack that is only now coming to fruition. It will guarantee them the laws they need to make copyright legislation absolutely watertight, like I said, FOREVER.

      • Guest

        *politicians

      • bobmail

        Too bad they’ll lose.

        • IDIOCRACY

          Did you just said the copyright industry will lose???
          Nice to hear from a troll that he also believe it is no use stopping the sharing

          hehe

      • Just being of service :)

        guess what, I just found a nice torrent.

        something about 543 ebooks for the not educated :)

        215f5986e5ad85300a13609d04e22c03e1f68b0d

  • Blog

    I bet whoever it is can’t even afford the book in the first place nevermind 7000 dollars. If it was me I haven’t got anything worth 7000 dollars they wouldn’t be able to recover it so they would be out of pocket in legal fees aswell. Loss of a sale and loss in the form of legal fees not a very good business model if you ask me. All they do is make themselves look like bullies plain and simple which again is not a very good business model. Are they trying to destroy their business?

  • 1hhh1

    only 4 days into 2013 and it’s not a happy/good one so-far

    • ScrewEwe2

      Don’t worry, be happy. (Hope I don’t get sued for copyright shenanigans cuz those are words used in a song lyric)

      Give me an F
      Give me a U
      Give me a C
      Give me a K

      What’s that spell? What’s that spell? (Oh oh, there I go again. In fact, I think “there I go again” was in a song too. Oh oh again. In fact “The” and “word” were also in songs. I’m screwed)

      • chris_p_bacon

        always look on the copyright side of life, whistle whistle

      • bobmail

        “Don’t worry, be happy. (Hope I don’t get sued for copyright shenanigans cuz those are words used in a song lyric)”

        Are you 12 years old or something? Every comment you make is incredibly childish, with a total lack of understanding of the subject at hand.

  • http://twitter.com/DuckTheNWO ☠ NewWorldStoner ☠

    To paraphrase the words of Richard Stallman, “Piracy” is the act of attacking ships on the high seas. I believe you mean “File-sharing”.

    • Pelham123

      If Lynn was talking about linking to a newspaper article, she definitely meant piracy/stealing. According to some Irish newspapers, linking to one of their articles without paying them a fee is piracy/stealing.

  • KhalidX

    Get the book from Library. Copy the disc . Return the book

    • chris_p_bacon

      one flaw. did you spot it? no? fucking books crap, no point

      • MadAsASnake

        Right – we aren’t all in the target demographic.

  • KhalidX

    Book cost $0.01+ $3.99shipping . Copy it Return it for refund

  • Ophelia Millais

    Ernesto, this article should be tagged wiley, like the others.

    This $7000 default judgment comes almost exactly 6 months after a similar $7000 default judgment against Poughkeepsie resident Robert Carpenter for sharing WordPress All-in-One For Dummies.

    A bit of Googling reveals what happened to the other named defendants in that case:
    Jeff Ng—dismissed, settled with Wiley.
    Xiaoshu Chen—dismissed, probably settled.
    Ralph Mohr—was apparently going to fight it pro se, but last event was Wiley’s lawyer canceling a conference scheduled for Sep. 28, 2012. What does this mean? Settlement? More time for discovery? Or did Wiley give up because they don’t really want to take it to trial?

    And is Verizon still refusing to disclose subscriber info?

    • ScrewEwe2

      “Jeff Ng—dismissed, settled with Wiley.”

      How the hell are you supposed to pronounce the name “Ng”?

      Although come to think of it, the name Bo Ng might make a good throw away alias some day

      First Name: Bo Last name: Ng
      Home Address: #69 Vít Bạn ngõ
      City: Phuck Dong
      Country: Vietnam

      • bobmail

        The way to pronounce it (for silly white people) is exactly how it looks. Think of how you would pronounce “ing” in things like “failing” and get rid of the I. that should be enough.

        The rest of your post comes off rather racist, actually.

        • ScrewEwe2

          Thank you for clueing me in Bobmail. Never have known how to pronounce Ng. Kind of sounds like an element cabrone. Gosh, using cabrone makes me sound racist doesn’t it?

          What part of my post is racist Bob? The name Bo Ng? I know you’re old enough to remember what a BoNg is because you love to try to make people think you’re their elder. Kind of condescending don’t ya think? I bet I got you beat by a few years, but who the fuck cares? With your law and order stance on things you probably never risked using a Bong, because smoking marijuana is illegal.

          Home address of #69 Vít Bạn ngõ translates to #69 Screw You Lane.

          City: Phuck Dong? Dong is Vietnamese for winter, and the Vietnamese đồng, is a currency unit of Vietnam and Dong is a Vietnamese surname. Ok, I made up the Phuck part of Dong Phuck, but it does sound like it could be a Vietnamese city, no? You didn’t think I was saying Dong Fuck did you, you dirty old man? Even though “Dong” can be slang for “penis, phalus or dildo”. So can the Chinese surname “Wang”. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

          Country: Vietnam. That must be the racist part. Silly white people shouldn’t say Vietnam I guess. At least I didn’t use the word Gook, Like many of my contemporaries used to. In ’72 at the age of 17 I volunteered for the service, with a friend, but was told to come back when I was 18. He got in, but I admitted to having tried the evil weed, and the Coast Guard wasn’t having any of that. He lied, LOL. In ’73 the military draft ended and so did my interest in military service.

          I prefaced it all with “the name Bo Ng might make a good throw away alias some day”. I suppose you use your real name for all interweb transactions and forms, because that would be the honorable and honest thing to do. Sorry Bob, but I’m a pirate and tend to shy away from using personally identifiable names on the world wild interwebz.

          You sound cockasian to me Bob, but I don’t go around presuming what race people are, so I don’t know or care, but right off the bat you guessed rightly, I’m a silly white boy.

          From now on I will not use any racially inspired names. I’ll stick to “white” names. Think I’ll use the name “Bob Mail” as a throw away alias. Sounds pretty darned white to me, oh boy. Maybe “Rob Mail” wood bee betterer, considering I’m one of those entitled pirate White Punks on Dope, who’s life went down The Tubes. C’est la vie.

        • bobmail

          @ScrewEwe2 All I can say to you is that you are wrong as they come… I happen to be probably about as white as they come (british / scandanavian). Too bad your sense of people is about as far off as your poor taste in racial comments.

          I’ll leave the sheep banging to you.

        • Rezident_User

          bobmail is the most prolific kind of racist to be found these days. A “bleeding heart” white person who sees minorities as helpless, in desperate need of being protected by his eternal vigilance.

          Keep smoking them out bob! Those secret bigots will never escape your eagle eye!

        • bobmail

          @Rezident_User: Far from it. I just am pointing out that the child called “screwewe2″ (how cute a name it is) clearly doesn’t understand any other culture or any other point of view. The attitude is racist, plain and simple.

          It’s not about any culture being weak, that is just typical slam shit because you are trying to cover for the racist child who posted the original comment.

          I would say that you just need to stop making stuff up. You make the child sound almost reasonable.

  • Roswell1701

    Owch!… OK, a $7,000 fine sucks. But it’s not nearly as bad as a $70,000 or $700,000 fine. What I’d like to know is, how did they get caught? The article didn’t give any specifics.

    • MadAsASnake

      IP trawling of torrents I believe. About 10% chance of them actually having the right person.

      • Roswell1701

        Interesting. The “Six Strikes” scam not withstanding, I didn’t think any ISPs really cared if their customers were into torrenting. All the more reason to go VPN. :)

        • MadAsASnake

          The ISP’s generally don’t care. They have to pretend they do sometimes or they are accused of being accessories…

    • Anon

      Solution- torrent magnetlink remove the tracker… Bingo no records of your traffic. :-)

  • commenter8

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/01/04/irish_newspapers_claim_links_to_their_articles_are_copyright_violations.html

    “[Irish] newspapers aren’t just seeking to crack down on sites that summarize or excerpt their articles. Their position is that publishing a hyperlink alone constitutes a violation of their copyright and is illegal without prior consent and payment.

    If it sounds implausible that the newspaper industry could actually have adopted such a self-defeating stance, a statement published on the trade group’s website on Friday seems to affirm the lawyer’s claims. In short, National Newspapers of Ireland—which also represents UK-based papers such as the Daily Mirror and the Sun—is lobbying the government not to adopt any changes to copyright law that would make it clear that a link alone is not a copyright violation. “Our view of existing legislation is that the display and transmission of links does constitute an infringement of copyright,” the group writes. That’s in keeping with the position it first outlined in an official letter it wrote to the governmental copyright review committee in July.

    This isn’t just abstract legal theory. According to the outraged lawyer, Simon McGarr, Irish newspapers have in fact been badgering Irish organizations that link to their sites with letters, emails, and phone calls demanding payment. McGarr says the newspapers are charging €300, or nearly $400, for the right to link just once to an article on an Irish newspaper website, with prices rising to €1,350 for more than 25 links. They’ve apparently gone so far as to hound an Irish charity called Women’s Aid for linking to positive news stories about their fundraising efforts.”

    • MadAsASnake

      … probably because the Internet has mullered their newspaper sales. Why would people pay when the news is free on the web? They are desperate to find a new revenue stream.

      • marxmarv

        Let them go quietly instead of inventing new exclusive rights for themselves. It’s not like they were doing much besides palace stenography anyway.

  • Guest

    Interesting how Nej, Anon, and Bobmail aren’t trolling this thread. I guess even they know that default judgements are bullshit.

    • Guest

      Maybe they’re bored. There are only so many ways you can say “Innocent people’s discomfort turns me on.”

    • marxmarv

      Speak of the Devil and he shall appear…

  • Guest
    • chris_p_bacon

      already got it, in real book form…at the bottom of the garden with a few people gathered ceremoniously around. they also have their copies…and now we are tearing pages out and, yes, we own them, so we are fu&&&&&&&&&ing burning the useless pieces of crap. and later we are going to download them and share them until the end of the world, or another harry potter film emerges, whichever the sooner

  • The Who

    You really are stupid. What about all the ethical hacking and network penetration courses I have taken in the US. Many companies pay for ‘white hat’ hackers to attack their systems to try and make sure they are safe.

  • ane92

    If you’re using public trackers and not using a VPN. You’re setting yourself up to get caught at some point.

    Use a VPN when downloading!

  • sammyman

    i’ll just never buy another book from J Wiley, as well never buy anything from any company that is involved in suing people for “extortion” … lost sales, my ass, would never have been bought in the first place … and as people have said, its’ a way of seeing if want to buy … i mean, who can read a book on a computer … they just lost my sale ….

  • Tsunku

    “jeez you greedy losers will do anything to keep from paying musicians, actors and authors when you use their work.”

    you are quite incorrect, we have no problem paying them, it’s paying ppl who had nothing at all to do with the product demanding compensation for doing nothing. screw the labels and publishing houses, they don’t deserve the money, the artists who created the content deserve it but because of those gatekeepers they rarely see any of it at all. yet you want to protect that and keep the artists poor and starving tsk tsk tsk.

    • Rezident_User

      Are you seriously suggesting that most file sharers don’t ever steal someone’s else’s work?

      These mass lawsuits should be shut down, but come on, from the days of copying floppy discs on a C64, it’s always primarily been about getting something for nothing.

  • chris_p_bacon

    how to lose sales and alienate people……for fucking dummies

  • bobmail

    Actually, the judgement makes a fair bit of sense. You have to consider the costs involved in the production of each original product, as well as the market that was harmed.

    Movies often cost 50 million or more to make. The book probably cost under $100,000. The economic losses would be in the same relative scale as well, as generally entertainment movies have a wider audience than a computer self help book.

    What is important in the end is that the settlement is still many, many times the cover price of the book, which shows that the courts do understand that the penalty for copyright infringement shouldn’t be “oops, forgot to pay” and a small $50 settlement.

    Frederika, care to spin this one for your fans? I can help you by suggesting that you start with “they didn’t pay $150,000 per infraction” and backfill with bullshit, which is your normal way.

    • Christopher Kidwell

      bobmail, the only one spouting bullshit here is you. The bottom line is that in a case of copyright infringement when it is not commercial, the maximum penalty should be at most 2 times the cost of the book in question.

      This just makes me turn to TOR-based sharing to share everything I upload and these rulings just make me even MORE goddamned enraged at these companies and less likely to ‘buy legit’ from them even if they have the best products in existence.

      That is the mean with everyone who I have talked with in real life about this as well who are under 60 years of age.

      • ScrewEwe2

        You tell him Chris.

      • bobmail

        “bobmail, the only one spouting bullshit here is you. The bottom line is that in a case of copyright infringement when it is not commercial, the maximum penalty should be at most 2 times the cost of the book in question.”

        That wouldn’t make sense, because that would create a situation where the risk of sharing the work with the world would be so low, that it’s not worth considering.

        Think it through. 2 time the face value means that, on average, you would have to stop stopped and found liable on almost every violation you make in order for you to experience any real loss. 2 times the cover price means that if you are stopped 50% of the time, you are still break even. 1 in 10 or 1 in 100 and you are making out like the bandit you are.

        At $7000 (actually $5000 in this case, the other 2 is for trademark related issues), the risk is about 200 times the cover price. It’s a question of risk and reward.

        “these rulings just make me even MORE goddamned enraged at these companies and less likely to ‘buy legit’ from them even if they have the best products in existence.”

        Go one better – don’t pirate it either. If you are still consuming their product pirated, you are denying someone doing better the chance to get ripped off properly. Share your crime around,don’t just reward these guys with your diligent pirating.

        Seriously, if you hate the company, do without their product. The same with the movies and music – live without it. Don’t consume it, don’t watch it, don’t listen, don’t tune your TV in for anything copyright. Stay away.

        Live without it. I dare you.

        • MadAsASnake

          The task of the civil courts is to make the plaintiff “whole”. That means actual losses (at most the value of the book) + reasonable costs. Reasonable costs mean that you cannot claim massive costs on a trivially small claim. Punishment is not the purpose of civil courts, that is government preserve under criminal law.

        • bobmail

          @MadAsASnake: Yes, and from a purely technical standpoint, the settlement should be much higher, because once the book is put digital and released in the wild by a pirate, it will continue to be shared again and again. Making them whole in an absolute sense would require the cover price times the english speaking population of the planet, who could potentially all end up with a copy for free.

          Yeah, I know… you think it’s an exaggeration to look at it that way. The problem is that there is no simply way to determine the total losses because it’s not like there is a simple way to see how many people have downloaded the book, unless perhaps you put a rootkit virus in there to report the numbers back. It’s safe to say however that if it was shared even once, there is loss. It is very likely that someone receiving the file will in turn share it on to someone else.

          The losses are never as trivial as the cover price of the work. That would not make the plaintiff whole. Once the sharing has happened, it should be up to the defendant to show how little damage was done, how limited the scope was, and then perhaps the courts can consider a lower judgement level. That file, put in the wild, is probably still circulating around online today, causing more damage. Can you deny that basic concept?

        • Wonderfool

          So basically, guilty untill proven innocent. Thats a new one, even for copyright trolls.

      • richardamullens

        I’m 64 and believe me, I’m in agreement with you.

        However there are parasite lawyers who are prepared to prostitute themselves to earn a living. It speaks volumes that they feel they need to come here to justify themselves.

    • Jfnwnlca

      So there are books that cost almost a $100.000 to make?

      LMFAO!
      Have you ever read a book before or… or! attempted to write one?

      Let me enlighten you just a bit, it doesn’t need CGI or actors, it’s a dude/dudette that uses their brains to create and their hand to write about their creation.

      Gawd almighty, that has to be the stupidest thing I’ve ever read on the internet.

      • http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater

        So why don’t you start writing a bunch of high quality books and give them away for free? Then you’ll se how long it takes to write one.

        • Guest

          “So why don’t you start writing a bunch of high quality books and give them away for free?”

          You mean like the hugely successful Paulo Coelho?

          http://torrentfreak dot com/best-selling-author-turns-piracy-into-profit-080512/

          Sounds good. I’d love to do what he does but unfortunately I can’t write for shit. I know, I know, I’m supposed to blame pirates for my lack of talent instead of accepting reality, but…

          Anyway, here’s a wonderful quote from him:

          “Since the dawn of time, human beings have felt the need to share – from food to art. Sharing is part of the human condition. A person who does not share is not only selfish, but bitter and alone,”
          -Paulo Coelho

        • Jfnwnlca

          Would you like some mustard with that bunch of books Nejtillpirater?
          hahahaha

          If a book is good it will sell no matter how much it’s fileshared, same goes for movies, games, music.
          Better believe it.

        • Hi Im Kimchi Men

          “So why don’t you start writing a bunch of high quality books and give them away for free? Then you’ll se how long it takes to write one.”

          Why don’t you? you’ve written an entire saga worth of book material on Torrenfreak alone. For free.

          But, wait.

          You’re paid to do it. OSNAP

        • Hi Im Kimchi Men

          And just FYI, getting paid to post on a forum is worse than making a book and giving it away for free. It’s right up there with Mc Donalds bathroom cleaner.

        • MadAsASnake

          We are talking Dummies books here. No doubt you are in the target demographic…

        • http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater

          @Hi Im Kimchi Men

          “You’re paid to do it.”

          Not at all. But the Swedish Pirate Party/lobby has about 10 persons on their payroll, paid by Swedish tax payers. I’m sure some of them write here rather frequently, both in the open and using various aliases.

      • marxmarv

        Movie producers budget anywhere from $50k to $5 million for a screenplay. $100k for a Dummies book of about the same number of words is barely fair, once you factor in all the other costs of turning your giant Word file into a bound, printed, retail-ready volume.

    • guess

      Mpaa/riaa/book publishers/other companies joined in on suing people. There are large companies out there that ONLY send dmca notices.

      Game companies profit and are not looking to sue anyone,Why? Because they are not greedy and they know if people buy used it has the same exact effect of filesharing. Plus its free advertising if your friends,family like the product and purchase it new.

      • MadAsASnake

        … and those that have tried have seen their customer loyalty plummet overnight …

    • Jimmy671

      Bobby boy is that really you,you don’t sound like your usual dumb self.
      Maybe some one else is filling in for you tonight.

    • Guest

      ” You have to consider the costs involved in the production of each original product,”

      You have no idea how much Whatever For Dummies costs to make, so the rest of your argument is invalid. I’ll still tear it apart for shits and giggles, though.

      “as well as the market that was harmed”

      Using numbers and facts, please prove how J. Wiley & Sons was harmed. Real numbers and facts, I mean, not the imaginary kind you pull out of your ass.

      “The book probably cost under $100,000.”

      No shit. This series of books rephrases free information that anybody can find in 10 minutes of googling. There’s a case to be made that J. Wiley should pay reparations to its customers for ripping them off.

      “The economic losses”

      What economic losses? Hint: if you can’t prove they exist, then they probably don’t.

      ” which shows that the courts do understand that the penalty for copyright infringement shouldn’t be “oops, forgot to pay” and a small $50 settlement.”

      Why should there be any penalty at all for a harmless and victimless “offense”? Even $1 is too much.

      “Frederika, care to spin this one for your fans”

      Anyone who isn’t a sociopath understands that being penalized $7000 over a book with a $20 cover price is completely demented, and that the publisher should never have been handed a victory when they can’t prove losses, and that default judgements are an insane miscarriages of justice that ignore actual facts.

      That’s just reality, and stating it is what we do.

      Spin is what you do.

      • bobmail

        “No shit. This series of books rephrases free information that anybody can find in 10 minutes of googling. There’s a case to be made that J. Wiley should pay reparations to its customers for ripping them off.”

        Okay, smartass. I dare you to take the time to write, using Google as your crib notes, an original book in the length of a “dummies” book, with complete illustrations. Take the 10 minutes or so you need, but remember, you can’t plagerize anyone (you have to write the stuff yourself) and you cannot just lift other people’s images – you have to make those themselves or hire someone to do it.

        Keep track of your hours. Figure out how much your time is worth. Tell me how much it costs you personally to write the book.

        Then hire an editor to review it, hire a technical person to check that the instructions in the book work well, and perhaps give the book to 2 or 3 “test” subjects to make sure they can follow what you are writing.

        Then send it to a copy editor and proof reader to make sure there are no gramatical errors, no spelling errors, and the like. Then give it to a typesetter / printer to make your copies. Then distribute them.

        Now, remind me again how you can do this in 10 minutes. I need a laugh.

        “Anyone who isn’t a sociopath understands that being penalized $7000 over a book with a $20 cover price is completely demented, and that the publisher should never have been handed a victory when they can’t prove losses, and that default judgements are an insane miscarriages of justice that ignore actual facts.”

        All the defendant had to do was show up in court and say those same things, and there would have been a default judgement. You cannot fault the courts for judging the case based on the evidence before them. The penalty is made up of two parts, $5000 for the sharing, and $2000 for harm to the trademark. $5000 is a pretty reasonable number, it covers only 250 “shares” of a file that is likely to be shared thousands and thousands of times. It’s easy enough to find popular books on torrent sites with thousands of peers, each one of those is a “shared” copy. The numbers make perfect sense if you actually base it on reality, and not some childish notion of “you didn’t see me do it”.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1794603998 Tom Sullivan

      Perhaps you don’t realise the irony when you refer to the movie industry? Do you know why they located in Hollywood? I’ll give you a clue. It wasn’t the weather. It was to escape the MPPC patents that they would otherwise be forced to pay if they stayed on the east coast. Sauce for the goose?

  • Natas

    Ephelants and woosles… ephelants and woosles… steal honey, beware! BEWARE!

    • Hi Im Kimchi Men

      RIAA is the elephant MPAA is the woosle

  • chris_p_bacon

    off topic. i enjoy ice cream and maffia fire redirect for srware iron, and sound cloud downloader and helping poor people, but i don’t really like people who pay fines willy nilly, unless they borrow the money from a stupid banker who has a lawyer relative and never pay it back.

  • Robin_masters

    Torrent anything and everything you will get caught. You need personal protection, like a condom

    • ScrewEwe2

      No more Ubuntu builds for me, ’till I get some condoms.

  • Rlessary

    It’s fairly simple, think of it this way. If you go to wal mart and steal a $2 piece of candy and get caught, do you get a $2,000 or $20,000 fine? No, because its only a $2 item, you will get maybe a 25$ fine and a slap on the wrist. 7k is way too much for one book.

    • bobmail

      Yes, because you stole 1 item, and nobody else benefitted. If you come in and steal 1000 pieces of Candy, you get a bigger fine.

      Also remember: There is a difference between a fine (criminal) and a civil lawsuit judgement. Fines in criminal cases are not set relative to loss or harm caused, but rather on a weird and arbitrary scale of justice.

      Example, you can get a $100 ticket for speeding on an empty road, and pay a $50 fine for randomly punching someone in the face in a bar. Only one of those caused real harm, but the criminal justice system is slanted towards making the speeding offence a bigger crime, at least in dollar value.

      Trying to make sense of it by creating a list of relative evils just doesn’t work out. The speeding fine is high because low speeding fines do nothing to stop speeding, a $10 speeding ticket wouldn’t be enough of a punishment for anyone to consider changing, and in fact, would likely encourage more people to speed because the rewards (getting their faster, enjoying driving fast) outweigh the risks.

      The true goal of justice isn’t just to make people whole or to somehow punish people randomly, it’s to try to encourage people to not commit the crime to start with because the results of being caught far outweigh any potential benefit of committing the crime to start with. The punishment has to be meaningful, it cannot be so cheap or so easy as to not have meaning.

      For most of us, we will not commit a first criminal act because having a record for the rest of your life can cause you plenty of problems when it comes to finding a job, traveling, and so on. The risk is higher than the reward. After the first offence, that risk is removed, which is one of the reasons why most people don’t have only a single crime on their sheet, because once you have broken your duck, the risk / reward deal is shifted in favor of the reward.

      It’s something to consider in the long run, and is very much the basis of why the laws are written as they are, and why the punishments often don’t make sense taken in the abstract.

      • marxmarv

        Actually, penalties for lawbreaking tend to be *quite* proportional to the effect on the state’s prestige and the authority of the political class. Person-on-person crimes have approximately middling penalties. Person-on-public crimes have light penalties, approaching meaningless if your crime helps the state’s ends. Questioning the state’s authority? Decades in prison.

        Ridiculous penalties for victimless crimes are the hallmark of a nation of men, not of laws.

  • http://twitter.com/phillyholt Phil Holt

    Seven grand? Wtf? The book is like $20. Charge them that.

    Why are file-sharing lawsuits so ridiculous?

  • Vectraat

    Why do people think that a VPN even keeps you safe?
    You do realize that the authorities can just subpoena the IP and the VPN company will be forced to hand over all your details.

    I’m not going to use some IP in a country wherein copyright isn’t strictly enforced and end up with shitty internet speeds.

  • James Smith

    Dear pirates presenting to you 2 million ebooks :D

    http://ebookoid.com/

  • XYLUM

    Boycott the “for dummies” books completely now, the publisher is a greedy and litigious 1%’r.

    Suing someone for 7000 dollars that couldn’t afford a 10 dollar book is ridiculous and moronic.

    They believe a few people downloading torrented copies of a couple books is hurting them financially, without a thought that maybe these people will appreciate the quality and content of their brand and then become customers that actually purchase those and/or other titles from them.

    Boycott them completely.

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.