Movie Studio Sues BitTorrent Swarm in Civil Conspiracy Suit

As the dozens of mass-lawsuits against BitTorrent users move through the U.S. courts, lawyers are slowly optimizing their strategies. This week an interesting case was filed at the Southern California District Court, as the movie studio Liberty Media filed a lawsuit against a BitTorrent swarm, “Swarm of November 16, 2010″ to be precise.

swarm The movie outfit Liberty Media has been very active in going after alleged BitTorrent users in recent months.

In January we reported that the studio wanted file-sharers to hand themselves in and pay $1000, an ‘amnesty’ scheme that mysteriously appeared to work. In addition, the company has started over a dozen (mass) lawsuits against thousands of BitTorrent users who allegedly shared their content without permission.

In a recent case filed on Monday, Liberty Media and their lawyer tried something new. Instead of simply joining the various defendants in one suit, the company is actually suing a BitTorrent swarm in the case tiled: “Liberty Media Holdings, LLC v. Swarm of November 16, 2010 et al.”

In the complaint they explain:

“The defendants are a group of BitTorrent users or peers whose computers are collectively interconnected for the sharing of a unique file, otherwise known as a ‘swarm’. The particular file a BitTorrent swarm is associated with has a unique hash,” Liberty Media’s lawyer writes.

“The torrent swarm in this case is not an actual entity, but is rather made up of at least 95 individuals, acting in concert with each other, to achieve the common goal of infringing upon the Plaintiff’s copyright both by illegally duplicating the Plaintiff’s Motion Picture and illegally distributing the Plaintiff’s Motion Picture.”

The lawyers then continue with a very detailed reconstruction of how the swarm came about. For every defendant they list the IP-address and the exact time when they joined the swarm. As the title of the case already suggests, all infringements took place on the same day – November 16, 2010.

swarm

Liberty Media’s lawyer then continues the complaint by describing how BitTorrent works, and how the alleged defendants worked together to distribute the files. Not only for their own pleasure, but also to the benefit of the entire swarm.

“In the BitTorrent world, there is honor among thieves. Those who merely download files, without publishing and sharing files, are derisively called ‘leechers’,” Liberty Media’s lawyer writes. “Being a leecher is not only negative due to the pejorative terminology, but leechers are also punished by the torrent swarm.”

According to the complaint the swarm and the 95 ‘does’ are, aside from copyright infringement, also believed to be guilty of a civil conspiracy. “The center of this conspiracy is the scheme to traffic in infringing content,” the complain reads, adding that the role of the torrent swarm is essential in this process.

Although it’s not explicitly stated, we assume that the emphasis on the swarm and the conspiracy are an attempt to circumvent the jurisdiction and improper joinder issues that led to the dismissal of previous suits.

By arguing that all defendants shared bits and pieces in the Southern District of California, even those who live elsewhere, the plaintiffs claim that the Court has jurisdiction. Similarly, it is argued that, since all defendants were part of the same swarm on the same day, joining them in one case should be justified.

Despite this innovative “sue a swarm” approach, the end-game of Liberty Media is the same. They want to know who the people behind the IP-addresses are, to kindly ask them for a few hundred or thousand dollars to settle the dispute. Pay up or else…

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_MAOTFGD7YJDDUBCJTP47RTCAKU Yuriy

AnonOps, please LOIC Liberty Media please please
Hikaricore

Don’t stop believing!
http://www.facebook.com/people/Don-Dilly/1624894683 Don Dilly

Sounds like a movie title in its own right, Oh that was ‘Summer of 63′
L4YER

Only in america :(
- hotdog
  
  you must be new stop blame America for every fucking thing that happens in the world.It gets stale old and washed out other countries do the same exact thing.Sometimes far worse then the u.s.
  - YarickZan
    
    Davenport Lyons, Tim Baley and Irvine (I don’t care if that one is how you spell it), ACS Law.
    
    Only in America huh? I’m fairly sure those are all law firms from the UK and they were the ones that started all this pay up or else nonsense.
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      I think the extortion racket started in Germany – but I’m unsure, so don’t quote me on that.
      
      The thing is, if it wasn’t for the MAFIAA using our cash to bribe US politicians to export their fascist hatred of filesharing for no cash, no profit and no gain – none of us would be in this ridiculous war of propagnda and litigation.
      
      So I’m afraid the originators of all this shit are indeed in the USA (unless Hollywood has at last managed to secede from the Republic and went feral).
    - Anon
      
      Let me understand this. If you get caught taking someone’s digital product and they offer you a way to settle, that’s extortion.
      
      If you get caught taking someone’s analog product and they offer you a way to settle, is that also extortion?
      
      To the creator, the rights holder, the law and to law enforcement, the only difference is imaginary, despite the semantics of “copy versus original” nobody gets paid when you just take it, and even an analog cd or album is a copy of the master, so it’s time to think differently, pirates and join the 21st century.
      
      Or at least stfu and appreciate they give you a chance to settle before they prosecute you for copyright infringement. I can’t wait until “drivers license type” online accountability is legally complete and infringement becomes a felony. Then we’ll see some settlements. lol
    - Ryzzo
      
      The Hobbs Act defines “extortion” as “the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.” 18 U.S.C. S 1951(b)(2).
      
      Yes, asking for $1000 to not have your name publicly attached to pornography over the download of a $20 dvd is extortion. Liberty Media is trying to use the court system to extort consumers into paying up a huge sum of money to keep their indiscretions off of the public record. This is a textbook example!
    - Anon
      
      You are just technically wrong. It would be extortion if the motion picture in question were downloaded and purchased lawfully as intended by the artists and rights holders and then Liberty Media leveraged the fact that it was porn to extort an improper settlement on top of that. Many “indiscretions” come to light in the commission of another unlawful act. Being observed and then caught in the commission of an unlawful act changes things considerably and I suspect you are smart enough to know this and unethical enough not to care. By your definition, the guys whose pictures are on the Post Office wall should complain. “Think of my children!!”
    - Ryzzo
      
      @anon
      
      The reason that these “speculative invoicing” schemes have been labeled as extortion is because there is no way that Liberty Media can prove that the defendant in question actually downloaded their product. The “evidence” they present is simply an IP address of a computer connected to a swarm. If the IP was spoofed or the download was not completed, then the defendant has done nothing wrong yet will still be pursued. Likewise, if the owner of the IP address was not the person that downloaded the content (ie: unsecured wifi or a shared computer in a household or dormitory), then again the defendant named has done nothing wrong. Yet none of these situations concern Liberty Media and they will ask the defendant for $1000 to avoid having their name publicly attached to a trial revolving around pornography. Since they have no evidence of wrongdoing and are requesting money to avoid public embarrassment, that is the definition of extortion. Hopefully that helps to clear up your misconception.
    - http://otester.myopenid.com/ PiRat
      
      @Anon
      
      It’s copying not taking you idiot.
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      OK, so it’s too difficult for you to figure out.
      Take some pills and lay your head to rest my weary and wearisome friend.
    - Anon
      
      You present a case that essentially says without more than an IP address, there can be no case. In fact, the social and legal trend is towards accountability for things you leave “open”, like pills around a child or a handgun around a teenager. Or a wifi in a dorm. If you have a problem with accountability–online or off– or this noticeable trend towards it, you are simply on the wrong side of history, and all you need to do is look at history to realize this. A civilization is built on what we do attached to our name, not on what we do while hiding anonymously behind obsfucation such as yours.
      
      The point of this is not the porn, and that’s obvious, as production companies with investments to protect in movies, books, games and music take a very similar legal path, and yet you don’t indicate the product in those cases as the fulcrum, because in fact, it’s not. And it’s not in this case either. In fact, were the IP address attached to a legal purchase instead of an unlawful download, there’d be no issue, no case, no fear of revelation. It’s about the illegal download not the content. I have no misconception about this and I trust this clears up yours.
    - Ryzzo
      
      @ anon
      
      While your response was articulate and well thought out, it in no way addressed the topic we’ve been discussing. Maybe simplifying things will makes this easier to understand…
      
      We said that speculative invoicing schemes such as the one Liberty Media is currently engaged in is extortion.
      
      You said that it’s not extortion because they are offering a defendant a chance to settle after being caught downloading content that they own the rights to.
      
      (Now based on your responses, it’s clear that you have some intelligence, so I’m sure you understand the difference between logging an IP address and actually catching someone doing something illegal. An IP address *maybe* identifies a computer, not an individual. Being connected to a swarm does not mean that any content was uploaded or downloaded. Only examination of the computer in question can prove that in fact a full copy of the protected content was in fact downloaded. Even the most rudimentary understanding of the internet will demonstrate that at this stage in the process an infringement hasn’t even been proven, much less the perpetrator of the alleged infringement being identified.)
      
      Now this is where I made the mistake of defining extortion instead of simply refuting the fallacy of your point. For this I apologize, but the point has been refuted above in parenthesis, so I think we can continue.
      
      You then say that many indiscretions come to light in the commission of another unlawful act. While this wasn’t really on topic but is sometimes true, asking for money to keep the indiscretion from the public record is called blackmail. Since at this point no illegal act has been proven, asking for money to prevent litigation is not a settlement, it is extortion.
      
      I then gave you several reasons why the IP address identified do not necessarily identify an infringing individual.
      
      This is where you kind of lost me… Instead of addressing the points I made, you essentially said that if the person hadn’t committed a crime he wouldn’t have to worry about the his reputation being tarnished by being publicly identified as a viewer of gay porn in a law suit. So far, we’ve only identified the person that pays the bill for internet service to a particular computer (maybe), and no infringement has been proven, nor has the alleged infringer been identified.
      
      Now if you would like to provide refutations to any of the points I have made, I would encourage you to do so, but posting off topic examples for whatever reason is not going to be effective. Let me leave you with this:
      
      If I spoofed your IP address to download Liberty Media content and they sent you a “settlement” letter asking for $1000 or a public trial identifying you as consumer of illegally obtained gay pornography, would you pay, go to court, or what?
    - Bryan
      
      Even bigger dumbass. Wow.
    - Anon
      
      @ Ryzzo
      
      What a revealing question, I’d go to court and publicly defend myself, of course. With a spoofed IP address all evidence would lead there since we agree I didn’t dL the porn in the first place and investigation would reveal all that and I’d be acquitted. What would you do? Hide?
      
      On this much we surely agree: Unlawful behavior online of all kinds will be grouped together and dealt with as a general, global problem on principle with no meaningful resistance from the masses. A few websites like this will complain a bit. That’s it.
      
      Mistakes will be made in the process, like any new process. These methods being tested by Liberty are a drop in the ocean of what is coming in the decades ahead, and I suspect underneath it all you already know this. This kind of unprecedented organizational process will always be imperfect and will always make mistakes but no one thinking clearly would argue that errors made in the protection of property (online or off) are reasons to allow property unprotected. Those mistaken will have their redress, as is conventional and fair.
      
      But that’s not the point. Mistakes will be minor compared to what is achieved. So within this messy process laws will continue to pass, freedoms will be curtailed, anonymity will be further stripped, accountability will tighten on all but the comparative few committed to anarchy, (argh matey lol) surveillance will increase, technology repeatedly used in the commission of unlawful internet actions will be classified or licensed (much like guns and cars) or banned outright. Enforcement will skyrocket with ISP’s as partners and personal protections will erode, while punishments will reach incredible levels of willfully applied agony to establish high profile examples. World government, by and large, will do whatever it wants/needs to, decade in-decade out, to secure a digital future that restores price for risk and investment where value genuinely exists. And the vast majority of the people will allow it without whimper. No question about that.
      
      Pirates don’t have the numbers to change this, you can only create damage here and there in the meantime as the process moves forward, in effect pointing law enforcement where the next round of legislation, loss of technology, freedom or punishment should be focused next.
      
      But you won’t stop, this is your “freedom of speech” to infringe digital merchandise, right?—so the circles will keep getting tighter while *they* control a little bit more each year. Hackers keep hacking, spoofers keep spoofing, bullies keep bullying and pirates keep infringing. At least we’ll have a clear evidentiary record of who compelled our burgeoning corporatocracy, and why. That’s just a fact.
      
      “The people” (as a group) crave the mental security that comes with knowing where the boundaries are and a pirating mentality that hides so it can unlawfully copy stuff to avoid the purchase will always be no more than just that: infringers forced into hiding, gathering merch while avoiding price. In ever decreasing circles of freedom. Forced to hide deeper and deeper. Until one human slip up and then those astounding punishments will come into play. Seems fair to me. But then again, I pay for the products I take.
    - Soad6
      
      @anon. you cant be accountable for locking your wifi when wifi can be broken in a matter of minutes by people that use linux… dur, also aircrack-ng exists and so does a program called pyrit, look into that as well and tell me if you fell safe locking your internet anymore. Now just imagine that the person has a program to change their mac address, which I have and change the IP theyre give by the dhcp. Then they pipe that thru another vpn on some public school or library thru an anonymous name. Good luck looking for that person, and when the governement or whoever does get the IP address it won’t be the real IP address they were looking for it’ll be someone else’s possibly or just an IP that goes no where. So technically how can you have a case over an IP that’s fake, or not the correct IP. Its like trying a dog for a murder case, not gonna fucking happen! Get some common sense sir or just go back to being hollywoods bitch!
    - Anonymous
      
      @ Anon
      
      If your “‘drivers license type’ online accountability” is ever implemented things will simply get worse for innocent people. There are some very smart people out there who will, I’m sure, easily be able to spoof an identity. And there are enough of them to make the tools to do so easily and widely available.
      
      But what you’re proposing is, in essence, that “identification” will be infallible. So, my response to your answer below (“I’d fight it”) would be “Tough. The evidence says it was you and the system is infallible. And don’t bother complaining because this is what you wanted.”
      
      Then what?
      
      Don’t ever understimate the intelligence or determination of hackers (and I mean true hackers, not the glib usage we see so often). Give them a challenge and they’ll certainly rise to meet it.
    - Anon
      
      “But what you’re proposing is, in essence, that “identification” will be infallible. “
      
      Oh, nonsense. Laws (as a general concept) are almost universally admired, but no system of enforcement is ever infallible. Even in areas in which we have enormous experience, mistakes are still made. We’re human. But what is achieved is enormous and historically well worth it, and dwarfs the incidence of error so this doesn’t mean or even imply we should consider curtailing our efforts. If the inevitable process of online organization leads to hackers doing harm to innocents, the fault will lie with the hackers and the world will view it that way. No doubt some people will always hack and no doubt the stakes will rise until they take on the image in some circles of a brilliant art or jewelry thief.
      
      But they will be as equally rare, too, and like the brilliant thief, should the authorities ever take custody the public will hear from them again. Just like in real life. And the masses will hardly even notice, going about their day, following the rules. Yours is a losing battle that secures only a sustained loss of freedom. Look back into history then out far enough into the future and you’ll see. Unless you expect billions with pitchforks to rise up. ;-)
    - Anonymous
      
      @Anon
      
      So in effect you agree that the “‘drivers license type’ online accountability” will in fact be useless and won’t catch “real criminals”?
      
      If so, what would be the point of it?
    - Ryzzo
      
      Very well said!
      
      @ anon
      
      Unless you are a lawyer, fighting these charges would cost significantly more than just paying the “settlement”, not to mention that you would still be publicly accused of viewing gay porn. Even if you were exonerated there would be people who never looked at you the same, and whether or not that bothers you doesn’t change that it’s inevitable.
      
      I disagree with you wholeheartedly that it is ever acceptable for an innocent person to be found guilty in a court of law. I would rather see a guilty man walk free than an innocent convicted without exception. The judicial system is built to protect the innocent above all else. You question the morality and ethics of filesharers, but what about a corporate entity that would knowingly factor these “mistakes” in as acceptable;e casualties?
      
      I just can’t even begin to understand this advocacy of yours for stripping the rights of the people to protect a small minority that tries to change the system simply to avoid having to prove their relevancy in a changing digital landscape. Also, I must have made a wrong turn at Albuquerque because we started talking about current events but ended up in 1984.
    - Ryzzo
      
      Very well said!
      
      @ anon
      
      Unless you are a lawyer, fighting these charges would cost significantly more than just paying the “settlement”, not to mention that you would still be publicly accused of viewing gay porn. Even if you were exonerated there would be people who never looked at you the same, and whether or not that bothers you doesn’t change that it’s inevitable.
      
      I disagree with you wholeheartedly that it is ever acceptable for an innocent person to be found guilty in a court of law. I would rather see a guilty man walk free than an innocent convicted without exception. The judicial system is built to protect the innocent above all else. You question the morality and ethics of filesharers, but what about a corporate entity that would knowingly factor these “mistakes” in as acceptable;e casualties?
      
      I just can’t even begin to understand this advocacy of yours for stripping the rights of the people to protect a small minority that tries to change the system simply to avoid having to prove their relevancy in a changing digital landscape. Also, I must have made a wrong turn at Albuquerque because we started talking about current events but ended up in 1984.
    - Anonymous
      
      @Anon
      
      The art and jewelry thief analogy doesn’t work here.
      
      Sure, they may be brilliant but they take one physical item, which they can then either sell or keep. Whichever they do there’s still only one item, and it will likely only ever be seen by a few people after the theft.
      
      But if a hacker makes a tool and distributes it freely then there are going to be, potentially, millions of copies of that tool in existence, which can and will be used far and wide by a huge number of people.
      
      If that tool is good then the users very likely won’t get caught. The original hacker might, that’s true, but by then it will be too late.
      
      You remember (or at least know of) DeCSS, LightingUK! and DVD Decrypter, don’t you? Or Andrew ‘Bunnie’ Huang and the Xbox? Or, more recently, George “GeoHot” Hotz and the iPhone and PS3 (not forgetting fail0verflow of course)? It’s all out there, being used every day, and no amount of lawsuits can put the secrets back in the box.
    - dawg
      
      Spoken like a true misanthrope. Yeah, these poor ol movie producers need all the help they can get. C’mon admit it your sadistic, you just enjoy the idea of “common” people being abused and robbed by the courts. It intoxicates you with the highest of capitolist fantasies.
    - Soad6
      
      how bout you stfu, the day copyright becomes a felony is the day I’ll quit using torrents you think? really then youre very mistaken sir. Its called a proxy, and a VPN good luck for them to try to get my real ip.
    - Gee
      
      As much as I would like to disagree with this, I just can’t. I have been following file sharing news for quite some time now and have nothing to counter this.
      
      I love my country but man the paid politics and shifty lobbyist are getting old.
      
      MAFIAA really does a good job at screwing a lot of shit (as Rob said) up, not only in the US but a lot of other countries as well.
    - Gee
      
      As much as I would like to disagree with this, I just can’t. I have been following file sharing news for quite some time now and have nothing to counter this.
      
      I love my country but man the paid politics and shifty lobbyist are getting old.
      
      MAFIAA really does a good job at screwing a lot of shit (as Rob said) up, not only in the US but a lot of other countries as well.
    - hotdog
      
      Yep those schemes pretty much started there.The lawsuits have been around with riaa . ifpi or whatever trying to be the music police have also been suing in other countries some people need to actually go to websites and see when these “associations”started some in the 60′s or less.
      Also let me rephrase my error which lately I’ve been doing allot I meant to say “Stop Blaming America”
      I might live here but what the fux does that have to do with America being America and Americans being American?
      This country is a melting pot of people from all over the world just Google u.s. history and you can see mainly where people came from when entering the us.plain and simple.
    - Anonymous
      
      The difference is that those companies are now dead. Because people did something about it and the government had to step in. So stop eating hamburgers and go be useful.
- sherboil
  
  And the UK.
- Bryan
  
  Dumbass
Derandark

haha, do they not forget trrackers insert fake ips into swarms? these guys are even stupider than i thought
Rabbit80

Fine the swarm the $750 minimum then.. only works out to $7.90 each :) Sounds fair to me!
- zWiReDz
  
  ^^ Agreed.
Anonymous

It seems nowhere do I see what movie this was.

I think Liberty Media does deserve a little praise here. Only doing 95 people from one day is much smaller than the thousands others do. So this can be seen as minimising the disruption and distress caused to people while adding more focus on testing the boundaries of the law.

Still this is still the same bad speculative invoicing scheme, so not that good, but I believe they have an opportunity to act in a more moral way. I expect to soon be disappointed.

I can only wonder the technical side. For example someone joining a swarm wont be at the same time you see them join your swarm. Also BT does not encourage uploading when it encourages download efficiency. For example I have sometimes downloaded movies by uploading a recorded nothing when everyone else is trying to send parts to me and my client concludes it a waste of time me trying to send parts to others.

We will hear much more about this Swarm in the future.
- Anonymous
  
  Honestly, I agree. This is the first time I’ve even heard a legal team explain exactly what is going on as far as how it all works and such. And they’re spot on. Their facts are solid. But still an IP address is not the same as a fingerprint at a crime scene. There are ways to spoof IPs, there are filtering mechanisms & botnets that could have you completely looking at the wrong person.
  - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
    
    It pains me to disagree with you Frosty, but this verbatim quote is far from “spot-on” let alone being in any way accurate whatsoever.
    
    “In the BitTorrent world, there is honor among thieves. Those who merely download files, without publishing and sharing files, are derisively called ‘leechers’,” Liberty Media’s lawyer writes. “Being a leecher is not only negative due to the pejorative terminology, but leechers are also punished by the torrent swarm.”
    
    It’s simply another set of DELIBERATE lies to fool the Court into believing something that isn’t real or true. Liberty Media’s legal team are proficient and clever when presenting those LIES, just as any other MAFIAA or pro-copywrong group in this new tech-war is.
    
    Prepare the hospital beds for more casualties nurse ….
    - http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais
      
      The only inaccuracies I see are not really that far off the mark. You’ll have to be more specific if you expect people to accept your dismissal of the claims.
      
      For example, there’s reference to a ‘file’ when they really mean a set of one or more files which are identified in a torrent file, and some of which may comprise copies of copyrighted content. This isn’t particularly crucial to their case though.
      
      Likewise, the definition of ‘swarm’ is inaccurate because of a grammatical error, the misplacement of an appositive which makes it sound like a swarm is a file, rather than the set of peers involved in sharing the files identified in a given torrent. But the intended definition is implicit in context, so it’s not a fatal flaw.
      
      The definition of peers is inaccurate in that peers are instances of BitTorrent client software running on the interconnected computers; peers are not the computers themselves, the people who use them, the people who own them, or the people who are the billing contacts for the Internet connections being used by them. Again, though, it’s not that critical of a distinction for the way they talk about the technology, i.e. the fact that the peers acted in concert.
      
      The “honor among thieves” bit about leechers accurately describes people’s attitudes in general, but ignores fact that the protocol and clients are designed, in a way that’s not really circumventable, to give higher priority to clients who can help keep the swarm alive…clients who won’t/can’t/don’t upload are thus automatically penalized, not for any nefarious copyright-infringing purposes but rather just because it makes sense from a technical standpoint, regardless of the copyright status of the content. However it’s standard practice in both civil and criminal law to take an extreme, adversarial tone, because that’ show the system is set up. No one is ever accused of being just “a little bit” or accidentally malfeasant and acting in selfish disregard for others and the law. They’re said to be absolutely, unequivocally, deliberately so, to every possible extreme. The defense is expected to be just as adamant in its protestation of innocence. The fact that BitTorrent users have no choice but to act in concert in leecher-penalizing swarms isn’t a fatal flaw in the plaintiff’s case insofar as the intended defendants were still ‘conspirators’ acting together to ensure that they each ended up with an unlicensed copy of the plaintiff’s content.
    - Ninja
      
      You may have a few points but if this is a conspiracy then our DNA conspires against us inducing reproduction. Srsly? There’s no conspiracy here and there’s no honor among thieves, first because there are no thieves, second because the “honor” is software dictated. You CAN subvert this depending on your bt client capabilities. His best bet here should be “they are infringing copyright by download and uploading copyrighted works without permission of the owner”. Then the only flaw in their argument would be that IPs are no trustful evidence.
    - Anonymous
      
      She (Ophelia) kind of does have a point regarding the ‘honor among thieves’ bit describing the attitude of torrenters, regardless of the torrent protocol issue, and discounting the whole ‘thief’ bit of course.
      
      We all hate people who hit and run on torrents (“filthy leechers!”), and there is a kind of ‘honor system’ involved in the “please seed to a 1:1 ratio” thing.
    - Anonymous
      
      She (Ophelia) kind of does have a point regarding the ‘honor among thieves’ bit describing the attitude of torrenters, regardless of the torrent protocol issue, and discounting the whole ‘thief’ bit of course.
      
      We all hate people who hit and run on torrents (“filthy leechers!”), and there is a kind of ‘honor system’ involved in the “please seed to a 1:1 ratio” thing.
    - Anonymous
      
      Can you point out any actual lies in their statements Rob?
      
      Apart perhaps for the “honor among thieves” bit, what you have quoted is in fact true. “Leechers” is a negative term, and I know that people use it that way when they talk about peers who download but don’t upload. And the “punished by the torrent swarm” may be colorful language but it is true of the way the BitTorrent protocol works.
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      The only person who is not a leecher on an active torrent is the original uploader. So EVERYONE is a leecher as soon as they click the button that says “gimme all this delicious copryighted stuff NOW coz I want all my goodies for free”.
      
      lol
    - NeonGen
      
      I was seriously waiting for someone to say that, It’s a shame it took reading halve a page. Your right, everyone is a leecher the first time they join the swarm (unless your part of a seedbox, but that makes you ‘one’ of the original uploaders).
      
      I think Ophelia Millais is trying to show how the current justice apparatus is going to view the case. As we all know even if a court/judge isn’t corrupt. Judges/Juries have a nack for falling for this kind of heroic lawyer rhetoric.
    - NeonGen
      
      I was seriously waiting for someone to say that, It’s a shame it took reading halve a page. Your right, everyone is a leecher the first time they join the swarm (unless your part of a seedbox, but that makes you ‘one’ of the original uploaders).
      
      I think Ophelia Millais is trying to show how the current justice apparatus is going to view the case. As we all know even if a court/judge isn’t corrupt. Judges/Juries have a nack for falling for this kind of heroic lawyer rhetoric.
    - NeonGen
      
      I was seriously waiting for someone to say that, It’s a shame it took reading halve a page. Your right, everyone is a leecher the first time they join the swarm (unless your part of a seedbox, but that makes you ‘one’ of the original uploaders).
      
      I think Ophelia Millais is trying to show how the current justice apparatus is going to view the case. As we all know even if a court/judge isn’t corrupt. Judges/Juries have a nack for falling for this kind of heroic lawyer rhetoric.
    - NeonGen
      
      I was seriously waiting for someone to say that, It’s a shame it took reading halve a page. Your right, everyone is a leecher the first time they join the swarm (unless your part of a seedbox, but that makes you ‘one’ of the original uploaders).
      
      I think Ophelia Millais is trying to show how the current justice apparatus is going to view the case. As we all know even if a court/judge isn’t corrupt. Judges/Juries have a nack for falling for this kind of heroic lawyer rhetoric.
    - NeonGen
      
      I was seriously waiting for someone to say that, It’s a shame it took reading halve a page. Your right, everyone is a leecher the first time they join the swarm (unless your part of a seedbox, but that makes you ‘one’ of the original uploaders).
      
      I think Ophelia Millais is trying to show how the current justice apparatus is going to view the case. As we all know even if a court/judge isn’t corrupt. Judges/Juries have a nack for falling for this kind of heroic lawyer rhetoric.
    - NeonGen
      
      I was seriously waiting for someone to say that, It’s a shame it took reading halve a page. Your right, everyone is a leecher the first time they join the swarm (unless your part of a seedbox, but that makes you ‘one’ of the original uploaders).
      
      I think Ophelia Millais is trying to show how the current justice apparatus is going to view the case. As we all know even if a court/judge isn’t corrupt. Judges/Juries have a nack for falling for this kind of heroic lawyer rhetoric.
    - NeonGen
      
      I was seriously waiting for someone to say that, It’s a shame it took reading halve a page. Your right, everyone is a leecher the first time they join the swarm (unless your part of a seedbox, but that makes you ‘one’ of the original uploaders).
      
      I think Ophelia Millais is trying to show how the current justice apparatus is going to view the case. As we all know even if a court/judge isn’t corrupt. Judges/Juries have a nack for falling for this kind of heroic lawyer rhetoric.
    - Anonymous
      
      Bollocks.
      
      Everyone on a torrent is a “peer”.
      
      Everyone who continues to distribute/seed back after they have 100% is a “seed”.
      
      Technically (in terms of the BT spec) a “leecher” is someone who doesn’t yet have 100% even though they may still be uploading/distributing the parts they do have. In fact, a “leecher” in this context may have seeded more than 100% of what they have received.
      
      A “leecher” in the context of this article, and in the general negative usage, is someone who downloads but but doesn’t reciprocate by uploading the parts they have downloaded, whether that’s during the period they download (hence the ‘punishment by the swarm’) or afterwards (a ‘hit and runner’).
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      Back to school for you my friend!!!
      
      (ASIDE – I was going to call you troll, dummy, liar, idiot, etc. but my Mum told me decades ago never to demean the disadvantaged.)
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      Back to school for you my friend!!!
      
      (ASIDE – I was going to call you troll, dummy, liar, idiot, etc. but my Mum told me decades ago never to demean the disadvantaged.)
    - Anonymous
      
      @Rob
      
      Lrn2BitTorrentSpec.
      
      I did, when i wrote my tracker software, and those are the proper meanings of those terms.
      
      Or maybe can you point out where what I said is inaccurate?
      
      Maybe “you need educated” (sic), as you once said.
    - NeonGen
      
      Well peer is not to be confused with leecher. A seed is a peer as well, so is everyone else in this peer2peer system (except the tracker). But everyone that doesn’t have the entire set/file (e.g. is still downloading) is defined as leecher.
      
      The term definition the lawyer used for leecher, describes what in many account based torrent communities is called a snatcher. One that takes and leaves. But they are not always punished, if they have an overall good reputation (and total ratio).
    - Anonymous
      
      “Snatcher” is a good term.
      
      But I think that the lawyer’s comment can be interpreted in both contexts. The design of the BT protocol does ‘punish’ peers who aren’t also actively uploading what they’ve downloaded (regardless of %age complete). It favours those peers which reciprocate as it makes the swarm more efficient and distributes the content faster.
    - NeonGen
      
      That depends on the tracker software. Often private trackers are setup to look at a persons account ratio and administrative flags.
    - NeonGen
      
      Cont: Since members of private network are monitored more specifically. Snatching users with a bad overall ratio are banned from the network, rather then getting banned from a single swarm.
    - Anonymous
      
      Ratios on private trackers are one side of it, yes. But the very design of the BT protocol ‘punishes’ peers who don’t reciprocate because it’s better (more efficient) for the swarm. This behaviour is built-in to every BT client, regardless of the tracker being used.
    - Anonymous
      
      Bollocks.
      
      Everyone on a torrent is a “peer”.
      
      Everyone who continues to distribute/seed back after they have 100% is a “seed”.
      
      Technically (in terms of the BT spec) a “leecher” is someone who doesn’t yet have 100% even though they may still be uploading/distributing the parts they do have. In fact, a “leecher” in this context may have seeded more than 100% of what they have received.
      
      A “leecher” in the context of this article, and in the general negative usage, is someone who downloads but but doesn’t reciprocate by uploading the parts they have downloaded, whether that’s during the period they download (hence the ‘punishment by the swarm’) or afterwards (a ‘hit and runner’).
    - Anonymous
      
      Bollocks.
      
      Everyone on a torrent is a “peer”.
      
      Everyone who continues to distribute/seed back after they have 100% is a “seed”.
      
      Technically (in terms of the BT spec) a “leecher” is someone who doesn’t yet have 100% even though they may still be uploading/distributing the parts they do have. In fact, a “leecher” in this context may have seeded more than 100% of what they have received.
      
      A “leecher” in the context of this article, and in the general negative usage, is someone who downloads but but doesn’t reciprocate by uploading the parts they have downloaded, whether that’s during the period they download (hence the ‘punishment by the swarm’) or afterwards (a ‘hit and runner’).
    - Anonymous
      
      Bollocks.
      
      Everyone on a torrent is a “peer”.
      
      Everyone who continues to distribute/seed back after they have 100% is a “seed”.
      
      Technically (in terms of the BT spec) a “leecher” is someone who doesn’t yet have 100% even though they may still be uploading/distributing the parts they do have. In fact, a “leecher” in this context may have seeded more than 100% of what they have received.
      
      A “leecher” in the context of this article, and in the general negative usage, is someone who downloads but but doesn’t reciprocate by uploading the parts they have downloaded, whether that’s during the period they download (hence the ‘punishment by the swarm’) or afterwards (a ‘hit and runner’).
    - Anonymous
      
      Bollocks.
      
      Everyone on a torrent is a “peer”.
      
      Everyone who continues to distribute/seed back after they have 100% is a “seed”.
      
      Technically (in terms of the BT spec) a “leecher” is someone who doesn’t yet have 100% even though they may still be uploading/distributing the parts they do have. In fact, a “leecher” in this context may have seeded more than 100% of what they have received.
      
      A “leecher” in the context of this article, and in the general negative usage, is someone who downloads but but doesn’t reciprocate by uploading the parts they have downloaded, whether that’s during the period they download (hence the ‘punishment by the swarm’) or afterwards (a ‘hit and runner’).
    - Anonymous
      
      Bollocks.
      
      Everyone on a torrent is a “peer”.
      
      Everyone who continues to distribute/seed back after they have 100% is a “seed”.
      
      Technically (in terms of the BT spec) a “leecher” is someone who doesn’t yet have 100% even though they may still be uploading/distributing the parts they do have. In fact, a “leecher” in this context may have seeded more than 100% of what they have received.
      
      A “leecher” in the context of this article, and in the general negative usage, is someone who downloads but but doesn’t reciprocate by uploading the parts they have downloaded, whether that’s during the period they download (hence the ‘punishment by the swarm’) or afterwards (a ‘hit and runner’).
    - Anonymous
      
      Bollocks.
      
      Everyone on a torrent is a “peer”.
      
      Everyone who continues to distribute/seed back after they have 100% is a “seed”.
      
      Technically (in terms of the BT spec) a “leecher” is someone who doesn’t yet have 100% even though they may still be uploading/distributing the parts they do have. In fact, a “leecher” in this context may have seeded more than 100% of what they have received.
      
      A “leecher” in the context of this article, and in the general negative usage, is someone who downloads but but doesn’t reciprocate by uploading the parts they have downloaded, whether that’s during the period they download (hence the ‘punishment by the swarm’) or afterwards (a ‘hit and runner’).
    - Anonymous
      
      Bollocks.
      
      Everyone on a torrent is a “peer”.
      
      Everyone who continues to distribute/seed back after they have 100% is a “seed”.
      
      Technically (in terms of the BT spec) a “leecher” is someone who doesn’t yet have 100% even though they may still be uploading/distributing the parts they do have. In fact, a “leecher” in this context may have seeded more than 100% of what they have received.
      
      A “leecher” in the context of this article, and in the general negative usage, is someone who downloads but but doesn’t reciprocate by uploading the parts they have downloaded, whether that’s during the period they download (hence the ‘punishment by the swarm’) or afterwards (a ‘hit and runner’).
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FCNK7C55CBUYFVSC5LNWKB322E Buglord

“common goal of infringing upon the Plaintiff’s copyright” …

now how much more of a fail could that even be? who would ever download something with a “goal of infringing upon [insert name here]‘s copyright” ? you download to [listen/watch/read/play/use] whatever you downloaded.
(yes, you can download books)
- Ninja
  
  In their delusional schizophrenic minds we are all united downloading and uploading their works just to “defraud” them.
  - Anonymous
    
    Honestly, that’s exactly what I’m doing. Fuck ‘em and their high on the hog lifestyle, when I’m on food stamps & have a child I have to provide for off of a minimum wage part-time job. FUCK THOSE GREEDY ASSHOLES.
    - Ninja
      
      The US will have to give up domination if they want to tend to their own citizens. This means giving up power little by little by getting out of wars (and avoiding new ones), shutting down bases and stop with their financial market worship. America is what I’d describe as an airplane losing altitude preparing to land. The way it’ll land depends on the Americans.
      
      Getting active in their own politics and applying pressure, including in the form of popular mobilization, is urgently needed (much like what happened in Wisconsin, Ohio and others but in a larger and stronger scale). The US won’t simply become poor or get broken, it’ll just be a nice rich place to live without the domination tendencies. More human if you will.
      
      Or it may go down the hard way, which would produce unpredictable results. We’ve seen how the Republicans love to use the military arm and this is very expensive so the best way out in the short term would be avoid them and their fundamentalism. But in the long term a political reform will be needed to allow a true multi partisan system with other parties including, why not, left winged ones.
      
      DNA works better when mixed with different sources, same with ppl, politics, religion and so on. There’s no real good solution, neither left nor right winged but a healthy mix of both where both work together with the nation in their minds, not personal selfish ideals or interests.
      
      The US are in a very privileged position, geographically speaking, no direct threats from neighbor countries, good and fairly abundant natural resources, plenty of land… It can be done.
    - Ninja
      
      The US will have to give up domination if they want to tend to their own citizens. This means giving up power little by little by getting out of wars (and avoiding new ones), shutting down bases and stop with their financial market worship. America is what I’d describe as an airplane losing altitude preparing to land. The way it’ll land depends on the Americans.
      
      Getting active in their own politics and applying pressure, including in the form of popular mobilization, is urgently needed (much like what happened in Wisconsin, Ohio and others but in a larger and stronger scale). The US won’t simply become poor or get broken, it’ll just be a nice rich place to live without the domination tendencies. More human if you will.
      
      Or it may go down the hard way, which would produce unpredictable results. We’ve seen how the Republicans love to use the military arm and this is very expensive so the best way out in the short term would be avoid them and their fundamentalism. But in the long term a political reform will be needed to allow a true multi partisan system with other parties including, why not, left winged ones.
      
      DNA works better when mixed with different sources, same with ppl, politics, religion and so on. There’s no real good solution, neither left nor right winged but a healthy mix of both where both work together with the nation in their minds, not personal selfish ideals or interests.
      
      The US are in a very privileged position, geographically speaking, no direct threats from neighbor countries, good and fairly abundant natural resources, plenty of land… It can be done.
    - Ninja
      
      The US will have to give up domination if they want to tend to their own citizens. This means giving up power little by little by getting out of wars (and avoiding new ones), shutting down bases and stop with their financial market worship. America is what I’d describe as an airplane losing altitude preparing to land. The way it’ll land depends on the Americans.
      
      Getting active in their own politics and applying pressure, including in the form of popular mobilization, is urgently needed (much like what happened in Wisconsin, Ohio and others but in a larger and stronger scale). The US won’t simply become poor or get broken, it’ll just be a nice rich place to live without the domination tendencies. More human if you will.
      
      Or it may go down the hard way, which would produce unpredictable results. We’ve seen how the Republicans love to use the military arm and this is very expensive so the best way out in the short term would be avoid them and their fundamentalism. But in the long term a political reform will be needed to allow a true multi partisan system with other parties including, why not, left winged ones.
      
      DNA works better when mixed with different sources, same with ppl, politics, religion and so on. There’s no real good solution, neither left nor right winged but a healthy mix of both where both work together with the nation in their minds, not personal selfish ideals or interests.
      
      The US are in a very privileged position, geographically speaking, no direct threats from neighbor countries, good and fairly abundant natural resources, plenty of land… It can be done.
- Anonymous
  
  I agree, poor choice of words. The goal is to get the movie or music. Amirite?
  
  Infringing copyright is just a effect of the main goal…
hotdog

Please tell me what movies they’ve made sounds like another inside job to me.To demand peoples info, when will people start realising your public info is private anyone giving out your personal info without your consent is against the laws regardless of the circumstances.Counter lawsuits should be made and put this company out of business.
Prpraprot

i have a sollution- use proxy server in europe.
that way you are invisible
just

ridiculous!!!
Ninja

Wait. Just wait.

I actually found the swarm approach devilishly clever till the point they started describing how things work.

First thing that made me go “wtf?” was the honor among thieves. First because there are no thieves in the case. Secondly because it’s a SOFTWARE based procedure to ignore peers that don’t upload. Flaw #1.

Then they mention a civil conspiracy. I mean, I’m at a loss of words to describe how retarded is this claim… But I’ll try. So 95 ppl that don’t know each other, use torrents for the most diverse reasoning (including but not limited to “get stuff for free”) and actually couldn’t care less about each other are part of a CONSPIRACY (to defraud if you wanna make things even funnier)??? Flaw #2 and huge lulz.

Then they try to dismiss the jurisdiction issue by telling that since ppl downloaded pieces from a copy based in [city name here] they can sue them anywhere. My computer contains pieces from China, Brazil, the US, Japan (and probably many other countries). Which means I can be sued in any of these countries for any unlawful thing I do with it. Srsly? Flaw #3 and some serious rofl.

MAFIAA, being your favorite clowns since copyright was born. Politicians, taking clowns seriously since politics was invented.
- hotdog
  
  I chuckled in laughter great point made.They forget people could always delete the files.what proof would they have then?
  - Ninja
    
    That! Being in the swarm doesn’t mean you’ve downloaded everything! And you can even upload much more than the torrent size before finishing it if you have good upload speeds. These flaws are for their claims but we can always find many more arguments against their intents.
    - hotdog
      
      Exactly!!
- Anonymous
  
  lol I love that last sentence. The way they portray it is indeed unsavory, but there is more truth to it than most lawyers ridiculous claims. Remember when they thought the .torrent file itself was a movie or album? lmao… I do. So give credit where it’s due. They did some homework, and though they don’t REALLY get it, they get it better than most.
- http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais
  
  I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s legal precedent allowing a finding of ‘conspiracy’ against people who collectively violate the law, even if the people involved don’t know or care about each other, and even if their intent to conspire at all, or to violate the law, can’t be proven. Even if there isn’t, the plaintiffs have no reason not to try. Civil courts in the U.S. are very lenient in that you can pretty much sue anyone for anything, in hopes that something will stick. The worst that can happen is it’ll get dismissed. Sanctions for frivolous suits are rare and tend to require repeat offenses. Probably this is the first conspiracy suit these lawyers have brought to this particular court, so they have nothing to lose.
  - Ninja
    
    True enough. It’s about time the US justice started charging for the money spent in idiotic lawsuits.
    
    Let’s see if the judges are as delusional as those Liberty Media morons. But in the end they just need an injunction or whatever you call it to force the ISPs to reveal the personal data of the ppl behind those IPs so without proper defense and considering that US courts are ran by a bunch of incompetents then they’ll get what they want.
    
    Maybe Nov 16th swarm should join the rest of the swarms and collectively defend. I wonder how they’d fare against 1 million ppl.
    - Whatever
      
      One issue is that there is no “swarm of 16th november”. The swarm probably didn’t start or stop on the 16th and the the swarm doesn’t start/stop at the beginning or end of a day. Also the members change all the time and nobody knows the next person, how would that be a conspiracy ?
      
      How about the different US “time zones” ? Could get funny if they try to sue someone on the other coast who can claims not to have been near the swarm on the 16th (because he was on the 15th or the 17th in local time).
Redbox Rocks

How can they prove that these people were sharing in CA. Doe 3 is located in Washington. They might have downloaded it from someone located in Tim Buck Two. If there were seeding can they prove that someone in CA received the files from them. It probably came from China.
- CHARLIESHEEN
  
  Its Timbuktu and is an actual city.
Prpraprot

Proxy.org is the pragmatic Web surfer’s guide to online privacy and anonymous web surfing.

actualy its not a dumb idea.if you hide yoursel they can’t find you.
- Anonymous
  
  Are you proposing to torrent over a proxy?
  - Prpraprot
    
    exactly……there may be slower speeds, but they cant track you. All they hawe is ip of proxy server, and if proxy doesnt log your ip, you are completly safe.
http://billy.wenge-murphy.com/ Billy Wenge-Murphy

” illegally duplicating the Plaintiff’s Motion Picture and illegally distributing the Plaintiff’s Motion Picture”

Downloading (duplicating) is not illegal, only uploading (distributing). It’s one thing to forget that when you spew rhetoric at the public, but this is a document submitted in court. Certainly you should make legal sense there.

Please either reference the case law that proves the opposite, or DIAF.
markie

I love how in America they think that they own everything. I’m waiting for the day when the US will say it’s compulsory for every household in the US to have video camers installed so they can monitor you.
- http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
  
  cf “Nineteen Eighty-Four” published in 1949 by George Orwell.
  http://btjunkie.org/search?q=orwell+1984
  
  It was meant as a criticism of the power of the (Communist) State and their incessant paranoia in wanting to watch and control each individual’s actions, speech and thoughts.
  
  Who would have guessed that it’s the USA that are now far more likely to proceed with such an absurd and distasteful concept simply because some hardass movie producers think that filesharing and new technology is damaging to their profit margins.
  - Ninja
    
    Cause the world goes round. And it produces wonderful ironies.
  - Ninja
    
    Cause the world goes round. And it produces wonderful ironies.
  - Anonymous
    
    “It was meant as a criticism of the power of the (Communist) State and their incessant paranoia in wanting to watch and control each individual’s actions, speech and thoughts”
    
    No it wasn’t.
    
    “My recent novel [Nineteen Eighty-Four] is NOT intended as an attack on Socialism or on the British Labour Party (of which I am a supporter), but as a show-up of the perversions . . . which have already been partly realized in Communism and Fascism. . . . The scene of the book is laid in Britain in order to emphasize that the English-speaking races are not innately better than anyone else, and that totalitarianism, if not fought against, could triumph anywhere.”
    
    – George Orwell, “Collected Essays”, letter to Francis Henson, 16 June 1949
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      If you prefer – simply remove “(Communist)” from my statement and we’re in agreement with your kind copy (get permision from the copyright holder? lol) of Orwell’s letter.
      
      No biggie. ANd I aint going to argue semantics with you or anyone else on a news site dedicated to all things torrent-related.
    - Anonymous
      
      That sort of extract is allowed under Fair Use.
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      Sez who? The YouTube bot? Aaaaahahahahahah ….
    - Anonymous
      
      Are you really that dumb, or just willfully stupid?
      
      The law says it:
      
      Copyright Law of the United States of America
      Title 17 of the United States Code
      
      § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
      
      Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include —
      
      (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
      
      (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
      
      (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
      
      (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      Thank you Officer, or should I say Agent Anon lol
      You’re such a great help …
    - Anonymous
      
      That sort of extract is allowed under Fair Use.
    - Anonymous
      
      That sort of extract is allowed under Fair Use.
    - Anonymous
      
      That sort of extract is allowed under Fair Use.
    - Ninja
      
      In a sense, it was meant to criticize what the Communist States were doing at the time so yeah, if we aren’t too anal about semantics Rob is right.
      
      Great post though, loved the quote.
    - Anonymous
      
      Kind of, but it was more intended as a warning against totalitarianism in any country and how easy it is for it to come about.
Hello, I’m a pirate!

Are these not the same guys who were going after a unicorn and leprechaun?

Perhaps they were in the Swarm as well!
- Anonymous
  
  Yes they are.
  
  I am sure that foul-mouthed Unicorn has just blew a fuse and his obscene curses can be heard over much of middle-earth.
  
  I bet that Leprechaun has not handed over any money yet either when they are a bunch of greedy bastards who wont pay for anything without some heavy torture that makes waterboarding look tame.
  
  Almost ripe for a cartoon strip.
SL

I set my client to report a different IP than mine to the tracker, I wonder if theyve just taken the ip list reported by the tracker.

If so, it should take seconds for this to be thrown out of court as unreliable info.
- Anonymous
  
  It would be nice if you would give some more info on how to do that. And how good that actually works.
  - Anonymous
    
    Most clients have a setting for this. Most trackers ignore it.
    
    uTorrent: Options – Preferences – BitTorrent – IP/Hostname to report to the tracker
    
    Azureus./Vuze: Tools – Options – Tracker – Client – Override tracker announce IP
    
    If it does work you make yourself immediately unconnectable as far as incoming connections are concerned.
    
    You should also disable DHT and PEX.
water

Every household in the developed world has close to free access to drinking water right from the tap, yet the bottled water industry makes BILLIONS of dollars every year. Yes, piracy poses serious competition for the entertainment industry but seriously, they make billions selling the worlds most plentiful resource. The entertainment industry should be able to figure it out.
- Se7en
  
  They’re already making billions. The difference is they think they can make more, by making file sharing seem to risky. Like we would buy their shit when they keep treating us like thieves.. Lulz
Momo

They show no proof that the IP addresses in question were involved in any file-sharing, except that they were allegedly part of the swarm. Is there any proof those IP addresses weren’t dummies, for example?

Moreover, since only 95 people were part of the swarm, we know exactly how many copies the swarm made: 95! These users didn’t share with an “unknown number of other individuals over the internet”, they shared with the alleged number of people in the swarm.
- http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais
  
  Well, yeah, 95 copies, at most, on that day, because 95 were part of the swarm then, but the swarm surely existed before and after the day in question, so it’s reasonable to speculate that at least some of the 95 continued to share with other peers on other days, and the exact number is unknown.
  
  Even if you restrict it to just the one day, it’s quite likely that each peer uploaded to only a small portion of the swarm due to the way the protocol and software is designed, and there’s no way to know which peers shared with which, so again the actual number of peers that each peer uploaded to on that day is unknowable, though it’s definitely no more than 95.
  
  A better strategy would be to argue that the defendants can’t be held liable for what they or others in the swarm might have done, only for what they are proven to have actually done.
  - Anonymous
    
    It could very well be more than 95, unless, that is, they captured every single participant of the swarm. Personally I doubt that they did capture information from/about the entire swarm but instead only recorded a sub-section of it.
- Anonymous
  
  I would suspect that they initiated (or were open to and received) connections to the addresses concerned rather than just relying on what the tracker reports.
  
  That way they’d have a record that the address was live, connectable, and that the particular torrent/hash was active on that address.
  
  It’s obviously a dead easy thing to do, and it’d be kind of dumb of them not to really.
Pingback: Movie Studio Sues BitTorrent Swarm in Civil Conspiracy Suit | Torrentfreak.com
Haxor

howto to prevent as discovery must then ask for that data you can get the ips info and then log the swarm yourself and guess what when they do that you can rmeove all the ips that are bad …..oh did i say that out loud
- Anonymous
  
  What?
t1wl3t

does anyone know if usenet is suffering from any of these problems yet ?
- Tor User
  
  Since your downloading from a central server your information including IP is recorded. So you would be a just as high of risk. Plus your payment for Usenet gives them your phone number and address.
  - t1wl3t
    
    good point, i’d forgotten about the payment details. I wish i2p would go mainstream. I’m guessing you are just using tor for only the torrent data, can people still see your address when you are connected ?
  - Cammie
    
    usenet doesn’t record what u dl and is anon….
    - Anonymous
      
      That depends on the provider.
    - Borderliner
      
      Says who? The generetic network might not “record”, but the particular server you’re downloading from might very well keep a track.
      Why Usenet is prefferred are the facts that there is no need for the downloaders to upload (downloading generally is not illegal), that there is no direct interaction between the uploader and downloaders (hence you can’t just read the IPs from the used client), uploading is a one time task (which BT in practice tends not to be, especially on public sites). Plus: Usenet has an established reputation that doesn’t depend on piracy, P2P is still working on that.
  - Cammie
    
    usenet doesn’t record what u dl and is anon….
Sooppex12

Ahhh…… archive.recapthelaw.org/casd/347603/

Download Exhibit 1….google the DVD name…..

Are they suing people over Gay Porns? Awesome.
- Anonymous
  
  Nice find.
  
  So this DVD movie is called “Down on the Farm” or the ful name is Corbin Fisher: Amateur College Men “Down on the Farm”
  
  Sounds like gay porn to me either that or farming for amateurs. Best find out what one before download or a BIG SURPRISE. LOL
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4SCIYMGGXZOLMMUXG7NRYIO5OY ma.flor

No hard evidences was collected. How can they sue “someone” base on the IPs? They even stated that the person was “Unknown”!

“We help Americans find jobs, prosperity and explore Asia.”
For details, visit http://www.pathtoasia.com/jobs
Motoxxx

Is Liberty Media a low budget studio, or porn…never heard of them. It does seem that the miners in the industry found a way to make money.
- TerribleTony
  
  Porn. They are morally corrupt, and likely to have originally uploaded the content.
  - DocGerbil100
    
    Liberty Media – which is suing on behalf of gay porn producer Corbin Fisher – has been featured many times in TorrentFreak articles, including this one: http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharers-….
    
    The article TF linked to back then included some interesting comments at the bottom (ahem) – one commenter (possibly a Corbin Fisher website subscriber?) suggested, without attribution, that the guy who allegedly settled for $250,000 at the end of last year was himself a CF subscriber, who was caught uploading to a torrent site from the same IP address he used to log in at CF.
    
    I’m not sure if this is the same swarm or not, but it’s not unlikely, I think.
- hotdog
  
  No porn lmao no actually after i googled liberty media llc i come to find out starz and encore(premium paying channels) is on their portfolio. I won’t say all they own just google it first link on the search viola you can find anything you need to know about them.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

If the content contains advertisements for their company or other products, or any other enticements to the recipients to do something that benefits the company financially, then you may be right. How would you go about proving it, though?
Johnny

Simply use VPN and you don’t get sued. VPN providers do not keep logs = no evidences.

http://www.ipredator.se/?lang=en piratebay offers this one

http://www.relakks.com/?cid=gb&lang=en

http://www.cryptocloud.com/

Here full list of many VPN providers.

http://filesharefreak.com/2008/10/18/total-anonymity-a-list-of-vpn-service-providers/
Equep

some vpn’s keep logs so find one that doesnt
Equep

some vpn’s keep logs so find one that doesnt
FkRob

Rob8urcakes enjoys taking it up the ass folks. He’s a flaming pirate :-)
- DocGerbil100
  
  We all have our crosses to bear – or insert, as the case may be. :)
  - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
    
    Erm, excuse me ladies but will you please leave my ass and it’s contents out of this.
    
    However, on a point of clarification – readers should note that with 100% certainty there is, and never has been, a cross or cruscifx or whatever, up my beautifully shaped, experienced and immensely attractive ass.
    
    And in truth – there’s no room left for such novelties thanks to the 14 inches of Galliano bottle (empty of course) …. lol
    http://thumbs.ifood.tv/files/photos/Galliano.jpg
    - Ninja
      
      You could have pledged to eat ernesto’s shorts while naked so we could see your marvelous arse in the process.
      
      Still, it seems you got a fan here in TF comments section ;))
    - http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
      
      Actually the ass (in general, and not just mine) really is a marvelous “invention” and I couldn’t live without one – it is my friend.
      
      But if you insist on viewing my bare ass (regardless of my teeth being clamped on Ernesto’s shorts, or anywhere else near his apparel), may I recommend you first subscribe to an annual (repetitive) subscription to TF and send the cash directly to me. You’ll likely find such a rip-off site on Google listed somewhere near the MAFIAA results.
      
      btw, I didn’t realise satire could be so brown …
- Dale
  
  And this is insulting how? Or are we 12 years old?
Capt. 3rd leg

The only pirate porn that is any good was ‘Friggin in the riggin’ aye n shivver mah timbers…
Fire_elmo

Liberty Media produces gay porn under the name Corbin Fisher. They have been receiving alot of heat because of how nasty, unprofessional, lying, and rude they have been. Even calling outting people from this funny. Bunch of assholes. If you search on them with their lawsuits they have alot of negative feedback and blogs caling them out on their BS. This is not about protecting their “movies”. Its more about getting money.
- Ninja
  
  Paraphrasing my gravatar: OH REALLY?
- http://disqus.com/ Rob8urcakes
  
  They’ve simply jumped on the “piracy is theft” bandwagon without thinking things through properly, and relied on a legal team to represent their short-sightedness effectively, viciously and with fervour.
  
  It’s their buck to spend how they like – but I reckon education doesn’t need to come so pricey. They’ll learn eventually how things can and should work to benefit their business – but for the time being they’ve swallowed the lies and propaganda.
  
  I sympathise but in no way whatsoever empathise with them. And the same applies to all others following this crazy “business model”. It’s a waste of time and money, simples.
Foff

I think liberty ought to sued for the crappy porn they put out and for conspiracy to waste everybody’s time. There is so much free porn out there now that paid porn is not worth squat.
DocGerbil100

This blog – http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/ – contains a substantial repository of information on past and current RIAA lawsuits.

I’ve only scratched the surface of the thing, but from a few of these documents, I have the impression that a fair number of past precedents require that – in order to prove conspiracy – the plaintiffs will have to show that the defendants were (a) the parties primarily involved in the alleged infringement and (b) were aware that their BT clients were actually sharing back and not just downloading.

The suit that Liberty Media have filed (as seen via the link given in Ernesto’s article) suggests that Liberty are asking for many of their claims to be accepted by the court on mere assertion, rather than through any actual evidence.

I can see no information given in regard to the software Liberty used to acquire the defendants’ IP addresses. The wording used suggests that the swarm was accessed via open trackers, thereby eliminating the possibility that defendants can be said to have such knowledge by merely having access to the swarm. It claims that participation in the swarm automatically necessitates a full knowledge of how a bittorent app works, including the fact that it shares back – something a number of US courts have already rejected as untrue in a number of RIAA cases.

Despite repeatedly claiming that “each and every” defendant knowingly and maliciously participates in the swarm, it also goes on to hold users responsible by way of negligence in it’s fourth cause of action. It says all “reasonable” internet-users are able to secure their routers from illegal activity, that failing to do so constitutes “a breach of the ordinary care that reasonable persons exercise in using an internet account” and that defendants with unsecured systems are guilty of conspiracy by neglect, a claim that just seems utterly ludicrous, on the face of it.

Regardless of one’s opinions on copyright, or any legal merits of the case otherwise, these more absurd claims seem highly unlikely to stand in any competently-defended case, in any halfway-reasonable court.
- Anonymous
  
  Copyright protection agencies are not about law and justice.
  
  If you cause them financial loss you are their enemy.
  
  If you are their enemy they will find you and try to harm you.
  
  If they can find you and harm you they will try to destroy you by any legal means possible.
  
  If you survive you were legally innocent but still badly damaged and violated.
  
  Welcome to my world.
God 3.0

Its not going to get better. Basically the down-slide is beginning. However, remember we represent a very small percentage of people who actually use this service, and know enough to get it for free, vs moronically giving information about ourselves and our hard earned money for DRM riddled itunes/amazon, etc. Meaning, we will see tougher and tougher crack downs on “file sharing”. I mean information is meant to be FREE< and always always find a way to be free.

But, as you see, they are throttling the internets (almost every ISP in the US and Canada I am aware of). ISPs are rigidly enforcing bandwidth caps! (another hit at the file sharer) They OWN the media, they ARE the media. Its all inter-connected. Look who has an invested interest. RIAA, MPAA, hmmm. Politics? Its all connected. No matter WHO/what party you elect MONEY CORRUPTS. Sorry.

Look, I cannot even pay the gas bill. How the hell am I suppose to keep up these corporate tolls/corporate citations? Thats what they essentially are. I mean charging people who stream music or listen to music on the Job? Who does that target? THE WORKING CLASS. Charing people who MAY show up in a swarm. I mean how do you even PROVE that in a court of law? You don't. You settle, and they take away your bargaining. When will it end. How am I suppose to defend myself from a mega trillion dollar industry who seems not replete in having consolidated all your wealth, or what you are worth in this society. I guess, they can sue me. Having a negative net-worth, they can line up in a long list of creditors, behind Chase Home Mortgages, and the State of Minnesota Department of Revenue :)
http://www.facebook.com/MelloMommy Melody Stanley

I’m sure that case would be thrown out here in Minnesota even with the names of the owners of the computers with the listed IP addresses. Minnesota had several red-light cameras and issued tickets to the owners of the cars that ran those lights. A suit was filed that claimed as there was no way to tell for sure who was driving in many cases (even with the pictures) that it was unlawful to ticket the owner of the car. The state Supreme court agreed and several years later the cameras are still inactive. The same could be argued in regards to IP addresses. Even if the IP address traces to a single residence proving who was in the swarm is impossible. Simply claim someone else must have been using your computer, or a neighbor may have used your wifi without your permission. Even in a civil matter where the burden of proof is lower I don’t think targeting a person because of an IP address alone is going to work.
- guest
  
  It must be nice to live in a state with some common sense.
zzzzz

America could make homosexuality illegal again and put this producer in jail for years.
If you use the law to attack people, don’t be surprised if it eventually gets turned against you.

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Movie Studio Sues BitTorrent Swarm in Civil Conspiracy Suit

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

NewsBits

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

Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

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

Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

MostDiscussed

Pirate Bay Takes Over Distribution of Censored 3D Printable Gun

The Pirate Bay Moves to .SX as Prosecutor Files Motion to Seize Domains

Copyright Trolls Threaten to Call Neighbors of Accused Porn Pirates

Game Pirates Whine About Piracy in Game Dev Simulator

Netflix Says It’s ‘Killing’ BitTorrent Traffic

CopyQuote

PopularArticles

VPN Services That Take Your Anonymity Seriously, 2013 Edition

Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2013

Which VPN Service Providers Really Take Anonymity Seriously?

What’s The Best VPN / Proxy for BitTorrent?

BTGuard Review: How Does it Work?

Optimize Your BitTorrent Download Speed