RIAA Orders WhoisGuard to Identify Torrent Site Owner

Ernesto
January 14, 2012
83
RIAA,
torrenthound
Print

The RIAA is continuing to put pressure on torrent sites. This week the music group went after the torrent indexer TorrentHound. The RIAA obtained a subpoena at the U.S. District Court of Columbia and has asked the whois privacy service WhoisGuard to hand over the IP-address, email and all other identifying information related to the account holder.

While the RIAA has a track record of going after individual file-sharers and services such as LimeWire, the music industry has never targeted any file-sharing sites.

Despite this lack of action, the RIAA sees BitTorrent sites as the main source of music piracy. In their most recent submission to the US Trade Representative (USTR) last November, they claimed BitTorrent “is responsible for approximately 50% of the industry’s global P2P piracy problem.”

One of the sites reported to the USTR is TorrentHound, and this week the RIAA put the wheels in motion to find out who is operating the torrent site. The music group obtained a subpoena from the U.S. District Court of Columbia and has ordered Namecheap’s WhoisGuard service to hand over all identifying information they have on the owner of the domain.

“We believe your service is hosting the above-referenced domain name on its network. This website associated with this domain name offers direct links to files containing sound recordings for other users to download by such artists as Lady Gaga, Michael Jackson, Coldplay, Madonna and Kanye West,” the RIAA writes in a letter to Whoisguard.com.

“As stated in the attached subpoena, you are required to disclose to the RIAA information sufficient to identify the infringer. This would include the individual’s IP-address and e-mail address,” the RIAA adds.

Interestingly, the identification request is not for the actual torrent site TorrentHound.com, which is registered through Katz, but for TorrentHound.net. The latter domain redirected to the .com site in the past, but it currently points to an entirely different site.

Despite the non-infringing nature of TorrentHound.net, WhoisGuard is expected to hand over the domain owner’s details.

In their Service Agreement they specifically mention that all personal information will be revealed when it’s “necessary to comply with any applicable laws, government rules or requirements, subpoenas, court orders or requests of law enforcement.”

The question remains, however, what the RIAA is planning to do with the information. Are they preparing to strike on torrent sites in the US? Last summer the music group also requested the personal information of the domain owners of three other torrent sites – LimeTorrents, BitSnoop and Monova – but thus far no notable action has been taken against the owners.

TorrentFreak contacted the RIAA for a comment, but we have yet to receive a response.

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

Guest

RIAA is just doing their job and a good one at that :)
- http://www.facebook.com/hopeyoufsckingdie Hope You Die
  
  I hope your mother gets raped.
  - Prick
    
    ^ Pirate mentality in full display above. Congrats.
    - James
      
      Better than RIAA mentality any day.
    - http://www.facebook.com/hopeyoufsckingdie Hope You Die
      
      Yargg!
    - Anon
      
      One more reason to throw these filthy pirates behind bars because they are no good for society.
    - IDIOCRACY
      
      ^ Corporate troll mentality in full display above. Congrats.
      
      (just pirating his text :D )
    - James
      
      How is a pirate in the high seas any different than the RIAA and the like Corporations? Both steal money by force and are corrupt. But we’re not talking about high sea pirates, just people copying, there’s a big difference. The RIAA and high seas pirates though, not much different.
    - http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FCNK7C55CBUYFVSC5LNWKB322E Buglord
      
      rape and plunder these sorry peasants .
    - Anonymous
      
      SCREW YOU !!!
      RIAA has ripped off Artists and Consumers for many Decades.you are nothing but a troll for the Industry.
      
      BOYCOTT ALL BIG CONTENT !
      I will also add that you should pay money for the Indie Artists.If they do not sign with the devil then they are our friends.
    - Guest
      
      No need to change your name paid troll we still recognize you and still ignore your fake opinion.
    - http://profiles.google.com/artfulldragon TL Dragon
      
      The RIAA mentality is to rape your mother, then charge you for the privilege.
    - Anonymous
      
      Why did his comment get removed? did it contain a lot of profanity? otherwise if DISQUS are removing messages they don’t like, then it’s time TF changed their comment system provider!
- tiger97a
  
  LET me ask you and i don’t down load music as most of it sucks but do buy from the ones that promote it on the Web so all can’t get the profits but the artist that are making the music does but here is my question-DO you really think you are getting somewhere by doing this and do you really think you are gonna stop the sharing at all as all i am seeing is you promoting it ever day with these silly law suits and witch hunts as these young people are laughing at all, even with your bought politicians you are having a hard time even passing a simple law that i am sure all thought would just go so easy over.
  
  i bet when you where younger you copied the radio all the time and now you want to stop these younger ones from doing the same thing because its easier and the quality is good, but getting back to my point the more i read and study this all i see is all promoting it.
  
  why not get a good idea up maybe like ever internet bill has 10$ dollars added to it and this goes to you and the movie industry and make content easier and drm free because when i buy a dvd that belongs to me and if i want to make a copy for my club or family to have i do it, now i don’t sell it or give out to strangers but we all buy one a month and strip and recopy it for each of us so we are only buying 20 dvd’s a month but each of us gets a copy from the other so we are only buying 1 each a month.
  
  i just don’t understand your reasoning behind your business plan as i can tell you its falling apart as everybody in my club is in their 50″s so i think all better wake up and smell the roses.
  - Guest
    
    No. I have a way better business plan for them:
    
    They Die.
  - Anonymous
    
    Just because they release a product does not mean they should expect it to make a profit. That copyright tax means if I release a product (any product, several even, no matter how bad or good) that for my life +70 years I can expect a cheque in the mail with my share of that tax (make enough **** and it’ll turn into a fairly decent amount).
    
    This would NOT encourage creativity or any endeavour to further humanity (science etc), the core reasons from which Copyright was first drafted to begin with.
    
    Further reading (familiar to long time TF readers):
    http://questioncopyright.org/promise
  - RiaaSuxDix
    
    Your rant is just plain wrong. Fuss at the riaa not the old hippies. The old folks that recorded the radio are still copying today just not as much seeing as todays music to them is extreme crap.
- Mental Extension
  
  How does it feel to be a slave?
  - AnOnYmOuS
    
    We are all slaves to the corporate machine… its up to us to fight it if we choose.
    - Anonymous
      
      Debtors slavery – by not paying for copyrighted items though you accumulate less debt which upsets the banks (via the MAFIAA) a great deal.
- Trespass
  
  You’ve got balls coming to this site and saying that. Or you are just ignorant. I say the latter…
- Guest
  
  Corporate paid Troll.
- Guest
  
  Are we going to let an handfull of foreign corporations fuck up our country?
  
  NO! WE ARE GOING TO KILL THEM ALL!
- Predator
  
  FREE HANA BESHARA!
James

Subpoena in a Civil case. Now, America is pretty much stuffed when it comes to laws as they are only favorable to Corporations, but, RIAA is a Corporation,and in a Common Law country, a Corporation as a whole cannot sue an individual if you lose the Mr. or Mrs. and be a sovereign. I might be totally wrong, but I always thought you cannot be sued in civil cases by corporations only by the individual effected.
- http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes
  
  I suspect you’re quite right James, but the USA passed a law that says a corporation is in effect a person.
  
  Bullying has never been a problem for the USA – whether it be against their own citizens or Countries worldwide.
  
  It’s all rather sad and will lead to much misery and pain that could easily be avoided if politicians would simply recognise the basic truism that only humans are people and as such only people should legally be recognised as a person – not a business.
- Stephen
  
  A corporation absolutely can and does sue individuals all the time. What would give anyone the idea corporations, of any structure can’t sue individuals?
  - Guest
    
    “A corporation absolutely can and does sue individuals all the time.”
    
    This is why we are going to kill them all.
  - James
    
    Because, a corporation isn’t an entity, and individual, a man or woman. When it’s a civil case, it’s civil, meaning, civilian.
Anon

As long as unlawful acts of any kind continue, there will always be the aggrieved who use the established legal infrastructure to protest, take down, punish and marginalize. If pirates want this to stop, pirates themselves will stop.
- http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes
  
  And when pirates get all these shit laws changed so that sharing of digital files for no cash, no profit and no tangible gain is lawful – you’d happily accept that, being the outspoken advocate of law & order yeah?
- Fredrika
  
  > “As long as unlawful acts of any kind continue..”
  
  Again you seem confused, clearly believing copyright holders are above the law. Torrenthound is a fully legal site. Torrenthound do not infringe on any copyright monopolies.
  
  > “..there will always be the aggrieved who use the established legal infrastructure to protest, take down, punish and marginalize.”
  
  Correct, fascists will always try to manipulate the legal system to hide the fact that they are failed entrepreneurs that doesn’t dare to man up and admit that they are useless as competitors on the free market, not offering any valuable goods or services.
  
  > “If pirates want this to stop, pirates themselves will stop.”
  
  Or they will simply change the laws, such as in the biggest economy in the world, the EU, where the only growing political group in parliament now is pursuing legalizing filesharing on an EU level.
- Tiger97a
  
  with store bought laws and i hate to tell you but you are losing this war bad.lol
- xxhyvcpr
  
  yawwwwwn
  boring. find new material and make it funny too :P
- Trespass
  
  Stop what, Anon? Torrents are the next logical progression of technology. Some of us who are older, remember taping songs off of the radio in the 60′s, taping whole albums, using our VCR’s to tape shows and movies off of HBO in the 70′s and 80′s, using our TIVO to record the same in the 90′s and 2000′s. If you have ripped music to your iPod, used a Xerox machine, used Google images or even Google in general, you are guilty of the same. I am in my mid 50′s and guess I have been a pirate all my life, by your definition. I suspect that you are guilty of some infringement as well since all of the above technically falls under the umbrella of Copyright Infringement.
  
  As I treat it, the internet is just one big broadcast channel. How can you say otherwise? EVERYONE is guilty. If you pass laws on one of the above (and it has been tried),it will affect everything else. It will be the end of technology as we know it.
- Guest
  
  Stop trolling under different names! We don’t care about your fake for hire “opinion” Nobody care Ok?
- Anonymous
  
  The most amusing thing about this particular comment of yours is that the court signed a subpoena which might as well have read “Please supply us with the contact and identity information of the penguin who owns the bowling ball carried on this feather”.
  
  I.e. as written this subpoena makes no sense. It’s literally a legal request full of direct nonsense.
  
  Meaning that this notice only serves to undermine an already frail belief in the justice system in general.
  You actually applaud this, applying yet another nonsensical and unrelated argument as “justification”.
  
  Piracy will never stop, and going from what we’ve seen so far simply grows along with the abilities of communications infrastructure.
  Thus, in order to even start combating piracy effectively, first you need to abolish the internet. This may be a hard lesson for you to learn.
Koala

what.cd next target?
- James
  
  I give up! What cd will be the next target?
- TF fan
  
  Shhhh…..
- Jimbo
  
  The RIAA tried to get them to shut down shortly after they opened and what.cd told them to go pound sand. The place has been going strong for three years – the best place to get music for free and proud of it. The RIAA will never be able to shut them down.
- http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja
  
  It’s amusing. They saw what a disaster was the Napster case (boosted file sharing like crazy) and TPB case (boosted file sharing and Pirate Parties reputation around the world). And yet they keep pushing for legal action against anything and everything, from nice sharing communities to grandmas, kids and printers. And I thought there was a limit to human stupidity. So I will not be surprised if they go after whoever is somewhat famous in the filesharing community.
Jim

what cd ? lady gaga ?
townie2

well, not much point in getting WhoisGuard, is there?
- Sneaky Buggers they are
  
  Seeing how they are a US based company … I would think not.
  
  But the only problem I see with the request is that the Rainy Mood site has no infringing material on it at this time.
  - Anonymous
    
    Well said.
Anonymous

I doubt much is going on here. TorrentHound may well have recently changed this domain from GoDaddy to NameCheap as part of the GoDaddy boycott. So this would just be the RIAA keeping their “enemy information” list up-to-date.

I presume this domain switched to Rainy Days only after this subpoena when NameCheap would have passed these documents on to the domain owner.

I did ponder if this was politically motivated but in that regard it makes little sense when a subpoena for information alone means little. PIPA is of course going through the Senate between the 17th and 18th meaning that now would be a good time to strike with any political action.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

The text of the subpoena says “YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents…: Information sufficient to identify the alleged infringer, including Internet Protocol address and e-mail address of the sound recordings described in the attached notification: URL address: http://www.torrenthound.net/” (emphasis mine).

Notwithstanding Mark McDevitt’s statement of the subpoena’s purpose, this actual text in the subpoena makes no sense and I think they should send it back for clarification, chewing up some more lawyer time, because:

1. A simple DNS lookup will give them the IP address of http://www.torrenthound.net; it’s not a secret. 2. a URL is not a description of sound recordings. 3. sound recordings do not have an e-mail address or IP address. 4. a URL does not have an e-mail address. 5. no sound recording shave been described. 6. a torrent portal does not host or distribute content – only torrent files, which describe a separate set of files that other people may or may not be making available, and which may contain a list of trackers which those people may or may not be using to facilitate that making-available.

Whether the files exist and contain what they purport to, and whether any copies are actually being made are impossible for the torrent portal site owner to know, so how can the owner be infringing copyright? MAKING AVAILABLE IS NOT DISTRIBUTION. COPYRIGHT IS ONLY INFRINGED WHEN A COPY IS MADE. ONLY THE PERSON MAKING THE COPY IS THE INFRINGER.

I’m not saying copyright isn’t being infringed, but a torrent indexer/portal website is simply the wrong target. Its role in facilitating infringement is akin to standing on a street corner with a sign saying “ask me about a free Lady Gaga album” and telling people “if you go down to to the next street corner, you might find someone there who might be making and distributing copies of something along the lines of what you’re looking for…or not”. Who is the infringer of copyright? Not you!
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

The text of the subpoena says “YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents…: Information sufficient to identify the alleged infringer, including Internet Protocol address and e-mail address of the sound recordings described in the attached notification: URL address: http://www.torrenthound.net/” (emphasis mine).

Notwithstanding Mark McDevitt’s statement of the subpoena’s purpose, this actual text in the subpoena makes no sense and I think they should send it back for clarification, chewing up some more lawyer time, because:

1. A simple DNS lookup will give them the IP address of http://www.torrenthound.net; it’s not a secret. 2. a URL is not a description of sound recordings. 3. sound recordings do not have an e-mail address or IP address. 4. a URL does not have an e-mail address. 5. no sound recordings have been described. 6. a torrent portal does not host or distribute content – only torrent files, which describe a separate set of files that other people may or may not be making available, and which may contain a list of trackers which those people may or may not be using to facilitate that making-available.

Whether the files exist and contain what they purport to, and whether any copies are actually being made are impossible for the torrent portal site owner to know, so how can the owner be infringing copyright? MAKING AVAILABLE IS NOT DISTRIBUTION. COPYRIGHT IS ONLY INFRINGED WHEN A COPY IS MADE. ONLY THE PERSON MAKING THE COPY IS THE INFRINGER.

I’m not saying copyright isn’t being infringed, but a torrent indexer/portal website is simply the wrong target. Its role in facilitating infringement is akin to standing on a street corner with a sign saying “ask me about a free Lady Gaga album” and telling people “if you go down to to the next street corner, you might find someone there who might be making and distributing copies of something along the lines of what you’re looking for…or not”. Who is the infringer of copyright in that situation? The judge who approved the subpoena should be informed of these issues.
http://twitter.com/al_d_25 booda dass

So.. WhoisGuard is just waste of money? How about you don`t host your torrent site in the US or other country that are mpaa or riaa friendly …silly ppl…
- Anonymous
  
  Well I can think of one advantage of WhoIsGuard beyond a basic spam-block.
  
  Normally on .com, .net and .org domains they insist that your domain has valid contact information. They usually suspended domains if say the telephone number has changed or if any details prove invalid,
  
  The advantage here is you can write total rubbish in all the fields and WhoIsGuard replace this junk with their own valid data. So your domain never gets taken off-line because people only see valid data but those who use court orders to look under the covers only see a pile of invalid crap.
  
  I would call that a good investment.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

The text of the subpoena says You are commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents [...]: Information sufficient to identify the alleged infringer, including Internet Protocol address and e-mail address of the sound recordings described in the attached notification: URL address: http://www.torrenthound.net/” (emphasis mine). That’s it.

Notwithstanding Mark McDevitt’s statement of the subpoena’s purpose, this actual text in the subpoena makes no sense and I think they should send it back for clarification, chewing up some more lawyer time, because:

1. A simple DNS lookup will give them the IP address of http://www.torrenthound.net; it’s not a secret. 2. a URL is not a description of sound recordings. 3. sound recordings do not have an e-mail address or IP address. 4. a URL does not have an e-mail address. 5. no sound recordings have been described. 6. a torrent portal does not host or distribute content – only torrent files, which describe a separate set of files that other people may or may not be making available, and which may contain a list of trackers which those people may or may not be using to facilitate that making-available.

Whether the files exist and contain what they purport to, and whether any copies are actually being made are impossible for the torrent portal site owner to know, so how can the owner be infringing copyright? Making available is not distribution; copyright is only infringed when a copy is made or when a copy is actually distributed.

I’m not saying copyright isn’t being infringed, but a torrent indexer/portal website is simply the wrong target. Its role in facilitating infringement is akin to standing on a street corner with a sign saying “ask me about a free Lady Gaga album” and telling people “if you go down to to the next street corner, you might find someone there who might be making and distributing copies of something along the lines of what you’re looking for…or not”. Who is the infringer of copyright in that situation? Not you. Yet that’s exactly what the RIAA has duped the judge into believing. The judge who approved the subpoena should be informed of these issues ASAP.
- Shiny Jirachi
  
  I like you.
- Anonymous
  
  You are quite right that this is a faulty court order.
  
  It could either be complied with to provide the hosting IP and primary hosting email, or they could send it back saying “you don’t know what you are talking about” and “no infringing media was stated” and “TorrentHound does not host any infringing media”
- Muso
  
  I love the way you put it Ophelia! Kudos!!
  
  I guess Google Maps should be guilty too, because they include addresses of (and maps to get to) all kinds of drug havens, crack houses, and all manner of illegal activities. They even include a handy-dandy street view for better reference. I suppose Google doesn’t actually know which of these addresses actually have illegal activity going on, But as they index them, and can point you to them (if you know how to search) i suppose they are like a torrent site. I suppose the telephone company is just as guilty. They have a phone book listing many combinations of numbers that may or may not lead you to an illegal activity. So they both are helping unlawful activities.
  
  Someone asked me where Bob lives. I sent him to 123 Elm St. That address is now a crack house. I guess I’d be guilty of enabling, although I never knew what actually went on inside Bob’s house lately. (Too bad they went to 132 Elm St. but as they ended up at the drug house, I’m guilty….?)
  
  Then there’s the story of a website as written by Ophelia Millais, above.
  
  So, when the cops bust a drug house, they have to include the owner of the house, even if he lives in a different country and didn’t know what his renters were doing, they’d have to include Google, and any other mapping company for listing in, as well as the telephone company, whether they had an active landline or not. Oh, throw in the gas, electric and water companies too, for being a passive participant in the illegal activities.
  
  Sooo, If I have links to torrent sites on my website, am I as guilty as the torrent sites? (google!) If I have links to torrents that are all perfectly legal, is my site illegal? If those torrents have numbers instead of names, are they illegal? What about a file that contains garbage but a name very similar to a recent blockbuster release?
  
  And on it goes….
- Muso
  
  I love the way you put it Ophelia! Kudos!!
  
  I guess Google Maps should be guilty too, because they include addresses of (and maps to get to) all kinds of drug havens, crack houses, and all manner of illegal activities. They even include a handy-dandy street view for better reference. I suppose Google doesn’t actually know which of these addresses actually have illegal activity going on, But as they index them, and can point you to them (if you know how to search) i suppose they are like a torrent site. I suppose the telephone company is just as guilty. They have a phone book listing many combinations of numbers that may or may not lead you to an illegal activity. So they both are helping unlawful activities.
  
  Someone asked me where Bob lives. I sent him to 123 Elm St. That address is now a crack house. I guess I’d be guilty of enabling, although I never knew what actually went on inside Bob’s house lately. (Too bad they went to 132 Elm St. but as they ended up at the drug house, I’m guilty….?)
  
  Then there’s the story of a website as written by Ophelia Millais, above.
  
  So, when the cops bust a drug house, they have to include the owner of the house, even if he lives in a different country and didn’t know what his renters were doing, they’d have to include Google, and any other mapping company for listing in, as well as the telephone company, whether they had an active landline or not. Oh, throw in the gas, electric and water companies too, for being a passive participant in the illegal activities.
  
  Sooo, If I have links to torrent sites on my website, am I as guilty as the torrent sites? (google!) If I have links to torrents that are all perfectly legal, is my site illegal? If those torrents have numbers instead of names, are they illegal? What about a file that contains garbage but a name very similar to a recent blockbuster release?
  
  And on it goes….
- Guest
  
  The judge has been paid and shall face the consequences accordingly.
- Anonymous
  
  Haha, totally right!
- Guest
  
  “Information sufficient, including Internet Protocol address and e-mail address, to identify the alleged infringer of the sound recordings described in the attached notification”
  
  It’s normal legalspeak, translated it reads like the above. Although properly they should have attached an addendum describing specific URLs and works infringed.
  - Danny
    
    I heard legalspeak in an insane asylum once, I thought the guy was just crazy!
Pingback: RIAA Orders WhoisGuard to Identify Torrent Site Owner « Darin R. McClure – The Good Life In San Clemente
Pingback: Notrackingme | Proxy » Blog Archive » RIAA Orders WhoisGuard to Identify Torrent Site Owner
TelezarZ

Every admin and webmasters of torrent website must register a domain where there arent Whois database. Like .to domains.
- Lube Oil VS John Doe
  
  The tonga provider is located in the USA aka they can still claim WHOIS data over it. Even thought it doesn’t display the data publicly it can still send it privately.
  
  Try register a domain name with a service which isn’t hosted, registered etc in the USA. Such as nic.ru and nic.af. Yes, they provide private whois data. (they are just examples, not saying go and use them… you’ll have to do research I’m affraid) a lot of people including myself use .to domain and internet.bs… they aren’t really THAT safe at the end of the day. but just a little bit safer than hosting with godaddy ^_^
  - Guest
    
    Wow didn’t notice that .to was so american…
    
    shit, dns server in the us, whois server in the us… wow!
Riaagettinsmarter?

Now I have to admit I kind of agree where they went here. I’m sick of not being able to whois a site, and getting false information. If your site isn’t generating revenue then fine you can remain anonymous, but if you are making money then this shouldn’t be false information and/or blocked it should be clear and transparent. I mean you can’t disagree there unless you are dabbling in unethical financial transactions. Not that I like the RIAA, but those whois blocking features and false information just shows you are doing naughty things.
Guest

All sites should use .bit instead.

http://dot-bit.org/
- Mr. Putin
  
  .bit requires the user to download software right? I doubt people will do so.
http://Operation-DarkSky.askaboutit.com Needlez™

In my opinion this is wrong of them. They have no right to forcefully request the information for this site just because of a name. They should need so called proof of the torrent files. Yes I’m sure there are files, but where’s the proof of the files, where’s the proof that this domain is even owned by this company anymore, and further more what judge would allow a third party company and not police or law officials the right to send out this information on a crime. If its a crime and not a civil case then the authorities should be handling this not the RIAA or MPAA. It comes down to is it illegal. Well if it is ILLEGAL to share information across the web then the police should be arresting or fining people that are doing this not a the RIAA or MPAA. Also I think WhoisGuard has a responsibility to the domain holder to not disclose information of the such. I mean if you where a doctor and the doctor did a normal blood test, and found drugs, he can not just go and call some third party and tell them you have drugs in your system. Now if it was for a drug test which is different he has to have papers and other information and you have to sign that you agree to disclose this information with you new or present employeer or whomever made you take the drug test. I just hate how these corporations think that because they have money they can exploit the system for they’re own gain. Well I hope that one day the system fights back and they wind up paying back to the people that they’ve sued for unjust amounts.
Xenobyte

Did a court really give this subpoena the stamp of approval?

The DMCA does not apply here! – The infringing data DOES NOT reside at TorrentHound, nor does TorrentHound link to any such data. A torrent indexer indexes tracker links, and the tracker indexes hashes of fragments that may or may not be infringing when put together but which definitely reside on systems theoretically all over the world – not on any system under the control of TorrentHound.
- Anonymous
  
  You can see from this court order that a Judge who lacks technical knowledge can be easily fooled into rubber stamping anything you want. The down-side of finding such technically incompetent Judge is that they cannot format the court order to get the right answer!
  
  This is a perfect case to highlight that many Judges do not know what they are doing. Then in such a trial it can depend not on the law but who can put on the best show to fool the Judge.
Anonymous

“information sufficient to identify the infringer. This would include the individual’s IP-address and e-mail address”
This just shows how little they know about what they are doing. An IP address is most definitely not the property of one individual and is used by more than one person in practically ALL cases.
And I don’t think I even have to start about e-mail addresses.
Pingback: RIAA Orders WhoisGuard to Identify Torrent Site Owner | TorrentForce Blog
anon

“…the music industry has never targeted any file-sharing sites.”

“Same goes for our other lawsuit with *cough* Music Canada.”
http://isohunt.com/
Bogosort

My favourite part of this article was the link to Rainymood.com.

Imma fall asleep to this tonight.
AnOnYmOuS

If the americans are attempting to do all they can to get themselves blacklisted around the world then they are doing a great job of it… I understand that this is the government allowing such actions to be taken but it is the PEOPLE who control who is in the government… I guess the people have become true lemmings and only follow orders without question… Its sad that few actually are fighting for the rights of many.
Anonymous… Bringing light in the darkest of moments.
Alyssa Blindy

Mama mia. Here we go again.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Don-Dilly/1624894683 Don Dilly

As Torrenthound is merely an aggregation site and does not even serve any torrents nor have any record of who originally posted a torrent and as an aggregator merely identifies what torrents appear to be out there in the wild, Its status regarding infringement is entirely neutral.

I would go further and say that it actually provides a valuable service to all, including copyright holders by highlighting what of their wares are actually out there.
Pingback: RIAA Orders WhoisGuard to Identify Torrent Site Owner : Remove spyware and malware, latest IT security news
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_D5H4ISWIJUQO3N2R2RKUIGQPDI Michelle

@sooopa……Simple tips & tricks about business,money and how you can get a nice income every month by using the internet: LazyCash4.com
Oomg

what a waste of time and money …. people for music can so simply go to YOUTUBE and grab ANY song they want (either with a little prog or a website like video2mp3….)

keep going empty your big pocket and go bankrupt !
Pingback: RIAA Orders WhoisGuard to Identify Torrent Site Owner | Droid Universe
http://www.facebook.com/ValhallaLegend Andrew Lee

The only way to truly stop it would be to set our asses back to the stone age. No more 40 million dollar house,car, and of course titties. Because the tools that are abused that made that one movie only make 2 billion dollars instead of 2.001 billion dollars also enable us to enjoy all the luxuries of life were so accustomed to.

Want that new cure for cancer? Well too fucking bad sharing of information is now illegal so it will take us a extra 900 years to master it. Why? Because some corporate dickhead rather watch people die instead of letting his precious information be shared.

Of course my statements above are grossly exaggerated, but they might not be so much in 3-5-10 years if shit keeps going the way it is.

There will always be a way with our without the internet look at the past people were technically doing the same thing with a VCR for movies and a cassette player to record the radio.

What will go down over the coming decade your guess is good as mine but if everyone just sits back and takes it I can guarantee we’re going to get fucked hard.

I mail and email my state representatives every week bitching about the current mess we’re in. It might be pointless but I refuse to shut the fuck up when freedom keeps getting hacked one step closer each day till it’s non-existent.

Yours truly,
That one guy who loves buying stuff as long as its not fucking shit.

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

RIAA Orders WhoisGuard to Identify Torrent Site Owner

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

Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

Copyright Trolls Threaten to Call Neighbors of Accused Porn Pirates

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

Game Pirates Whine About Piracy in Game Dev Simulator

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