<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Anti-Piracy Group Loses In Court, Doesn&#8217;t Want To Pay Costs</title>
	<atom:link href="https://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/</link>
	<description>Breaking File-sharing, Copyright and Privacy News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:19:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AFACT Blasts Judge, Will Appeal iiNet ISP Liability Decision &#124; News.Scenetv.info</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-644403</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AFACT Blasts Judge, Will Appeal iiNet ISP Liability Decision &#124; News.Scenetv.info]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 08:13:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-644403</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] to pay iiNet’s legal costs, revealed to be $5.7 million ($5.08 million USD). Earlier this week AFACT said it will return to court in order to avoid paying some of the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to pay iiNet’s legal costs, revealed to be $5.7 million ($5.08 million USD). Earlier this week AFACT said it will return to court in order to avoid paying some of the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: http://knewthetruth.webs.com/</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643641</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[http://knewthetruth.webs.com/]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 06:04:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643641</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[its nice..

pls. visit our site..

http://knewthetruth.webs.com/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>its nice..</p>
<p>pls. visit our site..</p>
<p><a href="http://knewthetruth.webs.com/" rel="nofollow">http://knewthetruth.webs.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: http://akoniakonino.webs.com/</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643640</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[http://akoniakonino.webs.com/]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 06:03:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643640</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[its nice..

pls. visit our site...

http://akoniakonino.webs.com/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>its nice..</p>
<p>pls. visit our site&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://akoniakonino.webs.com/" rel="nofollow">http://akoniakonino.webs.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yo yo</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643563</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[yo yo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643563</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AFACT&#039;s members involved in price fixing? Conspiring to rip off the consumers? Noooooooo

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162979/Sony_LG_Samsung_Hitachi_Toshiba_accused_of_price_fixing

 A home electronics retail store has filed a class-action lawsuit against Sony Corp., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Toshiba Corp., LG Electronics Inc., Hitachi Ltd. and several subsidiaries, accusing the electronics manufacturers of colluding to fix prices in the U.S. optical disc drive (ODD) market.

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/33826

MDL Docket No. 1361 read:

“The Plaintiffs have alleged in two separate amended complaints that the Defendants conspired to illegally fix and control the pricing of Music Products sold to consumers through Defendant Distributors’ adoption and utilization of Minimum Advertised Price (MAP) programs in violation of the Sherman Act, state antitrust and unfair competition and/or consumer protection laws. The Plaintiffs have further alleged that as a result of the conspiracy residents of the Plaintiff States and members of the Plaintiff Settlement Class have been injured by paying more for Music Products than they would have paid in the absence of the illegal conduct. The Defendants have denied and continue to deny each and all of the claims and contentions alleged by the Plaintiffs and any violation of law. The Court has not made any determination as to the merits of any of the claims or defenses of the parties to this Litigation.”

In the hot seat were:

    * LABELS: Capitol Records, Inc d/b/a EMI Music Distribution, Virgin Records America, Inc, and Priority Records LLC; Time Warner, Inc, Warner-Elektra-Atlantic Corp, WEA, Inc, Warner Music Group, Inc, Warner Bros Records, Inc, Atlantic Recording Corporation, Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc, and Rhino Entertainment Company; Universal Music &amp; Video Distribution Corporation, Universal Music Group, Inc, and UMG Recordings, Inc; Bertelsmann Music Group, Inc and BMG Music; and, Sony Music Entertainment Inc.
    * RETAILERS: MTS, Inc d/b/a Tower Records, Musicland Stores Corp, and Trans World Entertainment Corp.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AFACT&#8217;s members involved in price fixing? Conspiring to rip off the consumers? Noooooooo</p>
<p><a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162979/Sony_LG_Samsung_Hitachi_Toshiba_accused_of_price_fixing" rel="nofollow">http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9162979/Sony_LG_Samsung_Hitachi_Toshiba_accused_of_price_fixing</a></p>
<p> A home electronics retail store has filed a class-action lawsuit against Sony Corp., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Toshiba Corp., LG Electronics Inc., Hitachi Ltd. and several subsidiaries, accusing the electronics manufacturers of colluding to fix prices in the U.S. optical disc drive (ODD) market.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/33826" rel="nofollow">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/33826</a></p>
<p>MDL Docket No. 1361 read:</p>
<p>“The Plaintiffs have alleged in two separate amended complaints that the Defendants conspired to illegally fix and control the pricing of Music Products sold to consumers through Defendant Distributors’ adoption and utilization of Minimum Advertised Price (MAP) programs in violation of the Sherman Act, state antitrust and unfair competition and/or consumer protection laws. The Plaintiffs have further alleged that as a result of the conspiracy residents of the Plaintiff States and members of the Plaintiff Settlement Class have been injured by paying more for Music Products than they would have paid in the absence of the illegal conduct. The Defendants have denied and continue to deny each and all of the claims and contentions alleged by the Plaintiffs and any violation of law. The Court has not made any determination as to the merits of any of the claims or defenses of the parties to this Litigation.”</p>
<p>In the hot seat were:</p>
<p>    * LABELS: Capitol Records, Inc d/b/a EMI Music Distribution, Virgin Records America, Inc, and Priority Records LLC; Time Warner, Inc, Warner-Elektra-Atlantic Corp, WEA, Inc, Warner Music Group, Inc, Warner Bros Records, Inc, Atlantic Recording Corporation, Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc, and Rhino Entertainment Company; Universal Music &amp; Video Distribution Corporation, Universal Music Group, Inc, and UMG Recordings, Inc; Bertelsmann Music Group, Inc and BMG Music; and, Sony Music Entertainment Inc.<br />
    * RETAILERS: MTS, Inc d/b/a Tower Records, Musicland Stores Corp, and Trans World Entertainment Corp.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AFACT Blasts Judge, Will Appeal iiNet ISP Liability Decision &#124; ebusyet.com</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643308</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AFACT Blasts Judge, Will Appeal iiNet ISP Liability Decision &#124; ebusyet.com]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2010 03:18:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] to pay iiNet’s legal costs, revealed to be $5.7 million ($5.08 million USD). Earlier this week AFACT said it will return to court in order to avoid paying some of the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to pay iiNet’s legal costs, revealed to be $5.7 million ($5.08 million USD). Earlier this week AFACT said it will return to court in order to avoid paying some of the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AFACT Blasts Judge, Will Appeal iiNet ISP Liability Decision @ blog.idtorrent.org</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643273</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AFACT Blasts Judge, Will Appeal iiNet ISP Liability Decision @ blog.idtorrent.org]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:53:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] to pay iiNet’s legal costs, revealed to be $5.7 million ($5.08 million USD). Earlier this week AFACT said it will return to court in order to avoid paying some of the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to pay iiNet’s legal costs, revealed to be $5.7 million ($5.08 million USD). Earlier this week AFACT said it will return to court in order to avoid paying some of the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AFACT Blasts Judge, Will Appeal iiNet ISP Liability Decision &#8211; FUCK THE RIAA</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643197</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AFACT Blasts Judge, Will Appeal iiNet ISP Liability Decision &#8211; FUCK THE RIAA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643197</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] to pay iiNet’s legal costs, revealed to be $5.7 million ($5.08 million USD). Earlier this week AFACT said it will return to court in order to avoid paying some of the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to pay iiNet’s legal costs, revealed to be $5.7 million ($5.08 million USD). Earlier this week AFACT said it will return to court in order to avoid paying some of the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: And Of Course: AFACT Appeals iiNet Ruling &#124; CHARGED's Digital Lifestyle at Work or Play</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643159</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[And Of Course: AFACT Appeals iiNet Ruling &#124; CHARGED's Digital Lifestyle at Work or Play]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 05:37:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] but down in Australia, AFACT, a group representing the major movie studios, which had already fought having to pay iiNet&#8217;s legal fees after getting trounced in court, is appealing the ruling [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] but down in Australia, AFACT, a group representing the major movie studios, which had already fought having to pay iiNet&#8217;s legal fees after getting trounced in court, is appealing the ruling [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643134</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:50:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643134</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@ 80 &amp; 83.

Thanks guys!

Unfortunately, it had little effect. People just don&#039;t bother reading all the comments, and much prefer to skim-read the highlights and build the picture they want to see.
Take 91 for example. If he spent the time it took writing his trollcake to actually read all the comments, he could have saved himself the hassle.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ 80 &amp; 83.</p>
<p>Thanks guys!</p>
<p>Unfortunately, it had little effect. People just don&#8217;t bother reading all the comments, and much prefer to skim-read the highlights and build the picture they want to see.<br />
Take 91 for example. If he spent the time it took writing his trollcake to actually read all the comments, he could have saved himself the hassle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: networking student</title>
		<link>/anti-piracy-group-loses-in-court-doesnt-want-to-pay-costs-100222/#comment-643002</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[networking student]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:24:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=21783#comment-643002</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[BLAHBLAH I HAVE A MICRO$HIT CERT N THEY SAY THE TORRENTZ R BADS SO IT MUST BE TRU!!1!

I&#039;m with Freedom.Fighter@21.
It&#039;s is neither realistic or cost-effective in any way to use deep packet inspection, never mind the legality of such an invasion.
Take your MCITP and shove it up your ass, you probably could only pass the Consumer Support Technician exams anyways.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BLAHBLAH I HAVE A MICRO$HIT CERT N THEY SAY THE TORRENTZ R BADS SO IT MUST BE TRU!!1!</p>
<p>I&#8217;m with Freedom.Fighter@21.<br />
It&#8217;s is neither realistic or cost-effective in any way to use deep packet inspection, never mind the legality of such an invasion.<br />
Take your MCITP and shove it up your ass, you probably could only pass the Consumer Support Technician exams anyways.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
