Sexpert Uncovers Shades of Dahl in Piracy Witch-Hunt
Written by enigmax on December 01, 2008When TorrentFreak broke the news that lawyers had started going after alleged downloaders of gay porn, we knew that this time the anti-piracy dynamic would be different. Named in Forbes’ Web Celeb 25, Violet Blue, a sex columnist and educator has surprisingly added her dissenting voice into the mix, unwittingly highlighting similarities to a story put to paper years ago by writer Roald Dahl.
For those that have been hiding under stone recently, here’s a summary. In a break from going after alleged games pirates, and what is being viewed by some as a cynical ploy to force ’settlement by embarrassment’, UK lawyers Davenport Lyons have started targeting people its client DigiProtect says have been pirating their porn on file-sharing networks. DigiProtect’s company slogan is: “Turning Piracy Into Profit”. There can be little doubt that they are trying to do just that.
When we broke the news on 18 November we noted that things would be very different this time, particularly when the frailties of the evidence gathering were exposed by the wrongful accusation of innocent parties.
It didn’t take long. On 29 November The Guardian reported that a couple in their sixties were horrified that they had been wrongfully accused of illegally sharing the gay porn movie Army Fuckers.
Many people have commented on these developments, and now it’s the turn of a sex writer. Placed by Forbes in their Web Celeb 25 and named by Wired in their Faces of Innovation 2008, Violet Blue is, amongst seemingly a million other things, sex columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle and a best seling author. She also lectures cyber-law classes at UC Berkeley and is a Geek Entertainment TV reporter.
Writing in her blog, Violet Blue headlines her article “The New Face of Porn Racketeering?” Pointing out that this isn’t just any old porn, but “a Nazi gay male hardcore flick”, she goes on:
It’s sort of like if someone came up to you on the street and said, ‘hey I think you slandered me in a way that could be really embarrassing to you if anyone found out — but if you give me a couple hundred bucks, I won’t take you to court [where you’d lose even more money].’
Having enjoyed the work of writer Roald Dahl in both written and TV form (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, James and the Giant Peach and the genius of Tales of the Unexpected), Violet’s description of how she sees this operation reminded me again of something i’d mused upon earlier.
In 1987, Playboy published a short story by Dahl, entitled The Bookseller. The story features a gentleman called William Buggage who ran a rare book shop in London with his secretary Miss Tottle. Their business model was a little unconventional. Every day the pair read the newspaper obituaries looking for the deaths of married men who had left a wife behind. Armed with this information, they would send invoices to the grieving widows demanding payment for books their husbands had supposedly ordered. The books contained European hardcore pornography and ’sexual deviance’. Rather than face the ruination and humiliation of being named in court or the press, the widows would quietly pay up.
Those familiar with Dahl’s work will know that this master story teller is famous for the ‘twists’ revealed at the end of his stories, and The Bookseller is no different. In the end, Mr Buggage and Miss Tottle were found out when they tried to get money from a widow who revealed that her husband - far from quietly titillating himself with porn - was in fact, blind.
While most people acknowledge that Davenport Lyons have made some pretty big mistakes, no-one is suggesting that they or their clients simply make things up. However, for every set of allegations they get right (around 50% admit infringement and pay up), they absolutely get some wrong. They wouldn’t have expected that their allegations of sharing Atari’s Race 07 would’ve landed on the mat of a pair of pensioners and we will see if they choose to withdraw the allegations that the other pair of pensioners shared Army Fuckers. At the moment they find themselves in the position of the blind man - in receipt of a sordid accusation against them and absolutely no way of defending themselves.
In a statement to The Guardian, Davenport Lyons said: “We allow ample opportunity for the recipient to respond, and if they have done nothing wrong they have no reason to be concerned.”
The truth is much less straightforward. No matter how people defend themselves in the face of these allegations, Davenport Lyons continually argue that they are right, and the accused is wrong. When I pointed out the Dahl story to someone involved in the cases, this was the reply, which is an adaptation of a real response to those who try to plead their innocence:
It’s a shame for Mr. Buggage and Miss Tottle they didn’t have the knowledge and expertise of messrs Davenport Lyons. They could have easily argued in that case that “it is irrelevant for the purposes of our clients evidence how the European books of pornography and sexual deviance (”the Work”) came to be acquired in your blind late husband’s name. What our client’s evidence shows is that the Work was made available from an Internet connection registered in your late blind husband’s name on a certain date and time”
But while there are certain similarities with Dahl’s story, one point appears entirely mirrored. While the widows in The Bookseller pay up to avoid appearing in the press, those wrongfully accused by Davenport Lyons are going to the press for protection. Those that don’t have age on their side don’t find the going quite so easy.
Previously: Top 10 Most Pirated Movies on BitTorrent
Next: Will uTorrent Really Kill the Internet?
34 Responses
Well my Response to him is.. I hope someone kills you soon.
Hes blind you stupid f*ck, HE IS BLIND. HE CANNOT SEE THE PORN YOU F*CKING TWAT.
Whomever that was, needs to have every legal privilege he has taken away.
It is people like him that will ruin everything, he will destroy all humanity.
That is not blind justice, that is blind corruption.
.
Everyone that receives one of these should tell them all where to go and to continue and communications through their lawers.
@1 Re-read the article. You will see that they haven’t accused a blind person of sharing anything. [as far as we know]
@1
the story was just a way of showing how the bookstore (Big company) Blackmails (weak and defenceless eldarly)
However those without blind husbands (Eldarly couples) are less likely to be believed if they go to the press and therefore made to pay much like the widows in the story
I know that #4, im talking about the guys response to the story. He just starts rambling on about lawyer BS, completely ignoring the fact the guy is BLIND.
Brits are not as “sweet” as Americans, esp the younger ones, go to any soccer game where there’s a UK team playing and see for yourself.
I hung around with some really nice people from Britain, till they got drunk and just wanted a good ol’ punch-up :D
This happened in Stockholm, Prague, Rome and even in London… different sets of people too.
I predict something nasty is going to happen very soon to people working at DL once they accuse the wrong person, no matter if they did download something or not… and I for one am not going to shed a tear over it when people from DL are found with their faces smashed in.
Cheers!
http://www.eZee.se
The fact that he is blind was the point of his post. He was making a joke about the way DL practice. It was not his own opinion that the analogical blind man should pay up.
First there was the ‘wireless defence’ now there is the “I’m blind” defence. Off to get my soldering iron.
Someone should try to fake or hijack some important persons(like brittish prime minister or the queen or something) IP address then download alot of material that is on digiprotects list. Then we’ll see what happens when Davenmorons send a letter to them, might be interesting to see how fast they sue davenport and digiprotect :D
@ torrentfreak
check this out
In RiP: A remix manifesto, Web activist and filmmaker Brett Gaylor explores issues of copyright in the information age, mashing up the media landscape of the 20th century and shattering the wall between users and producers.
http://www3.nfb.ca/webextension/rip-a-remix-manifesto/
Hehe, does the name of the bookstore guy refer to Bukkake?
He’s guilty as charged. Apparently he had whacked it to too many gay porno’s and has gone blind. Now he’s trying to use the “oh i’m blind” excuse. We’ll sir your not going to fool me!
Ahh, the sweet stench of crooks in hot water.
Live it up while you can, DigiProtect & Davinport Lyons. Your expiration date is nearing.
Davenport Lyons, are getting a really bad rep for themselves of late.
http://www.aquariumfish.me
@13 lol
those pensioners should file a counter-suit for deformation, mental anguish loss of earnings and what ever else they can think of. take DL to court. whos gonna win, loveable doddery pensioners or evil gay-porn peddling copyright nazis?
Jesus, can’t you people read a simple article. There is no blind man being accused of anything. Take you head out of you ass, and re-read the article.
@ #18 Hacked lines?!? Seems more like you can’t even find your own caps-lock key. :p
Lol fail. What a fail law firm. They sued a DEAD, BLIND MAN!, on dodgey, circumstantial and easily forgeable evidence from a dodgey company.
@1: You must be blind …. pls to read the article again.
By the way #1 …. only joking about the blind comment … couldn’t resist the playful remark :)
im amazed at how many people here cannot read the article correctly…
the BLIND person was in the novel by Dahl, and the “letter” was someone modifying it as if the blind, deceased husband was being sued by DL
Don’t bother trying to explain the “blind man” part. 90% of the people reading this article are too dim-witted to understand the concept of an analogy.
you people are serious idiots, i know the blind person is in a STORY. I was commenting on a the comment of the story.
Guy was saying it doesnt matter if the “blind” guy was blind or not, they still have evidence so they should prosecute anyway.
thats complete bs. Perhaps im interpreting this all wrong, and the guy commenting is being sarcastic..
Insert Peter Griffin laugh here. Ehehehehehehe
blind man is in the novel idiots
@24 thats what I said numbnuts. The post was sarcastic.
*shvroooom.* Over your head.
I demand more dispute over this not-yet-fully-interpreted reply, from the otherwise insignificant article!
This is hilarious.
Yes, it’s true: it’s almost impossible to write something that others can understand, which is one reason why Steve King makes so much money.
@29: Wait, what?
Good Article but needs to link to Violet Blue blog/article.
Citations pls!
money money money……
I call Godwin’s law.
@14
Truer words were never spoken.
@7
It’s called justice. And I won’t shed any tears when it happens either.
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.