Comcast, Verizon Ordered To ID Subscribers to Pornographers

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I'm not saying you should panic but, if you use Comcast or Verizon and live in any of the towns listed below, don't answer the door if they look like a pornographer, process server or both.

But two of Maryland’s largest Internet service providers—Comcast and Verizon—have been ordered by a federal judge in Greenbelt to turn over the personal identities of 22 subscribers known to Patrick Collins Inc. only by numeric Internet Protocol (IP) addresses. The anonymous subscribers in that case are located throughout the state: Towson, Annapolis, Sykesville, Westminster, Rockville, Columbia, Bowie, Reisterstown, Parkville, Frederick, La Plata, Germantown and Potomac.
Click to expand...
 
on the other hand, they could be an adult about it, answer the door, and take responsibility for their actions
 
I just laugh when I think about how these companies that are exploiting young women (and some men) are now getting exploited by piracy.
 
Why would you need to pirate porn when you can go to a billion free porno websites?
 
timta2 said:
I just laugh when I think about how these companies that are exploiting young women (and some men) are now getting exploited by piracy.
Click to expand...

Assuming the porn is legal, it's definitely not exploitation. That doesn't mean exploitation is nonexistent but it certainly isn't the norm.
 
PsychoAMD said:
Why would you need to pirate porn when you can go to a billion free porno websites?
Click to expand...

1 reason: Quality made porn
2nd reason: HD porn
3rd reason: No spyware and ads
4th reason: does not require internet (most free sites "stream" right?)
5th reason: No loading a.k.a buffering (waiting and porn do not mix well :eek: )

and on and on rofl :D
 
HD for sure. and i disagree with the exploitation. sure there is some and its terrible, but whats online is almost all just women looking for an easy paycheck. is it demeaning? absolutely. would i want my gf doing it? definitely not. do they know what theyre doing for a paycheck before they do it? yes. no ones making them make porn other than their desire to not work 40 hours/wk.
 
ekuest said:
HD for sure. and i disagree with the exploitation. sure there is some and its terrible, but whats online is almost all just women looking for an easy paycheck. is it demeaning? absolutely. would i want my gf doing it? definitely not. do they know what theyre doing for a paycheck before they do it? yes. no ones making them make porn other than their desire to not work 40 hours/wk.
Click to expand...
I started looking into porn star salaries after reading this post, and it's actually pretty depressing. They're still putting in big hours and most make under $1k per scene, and half that if you're the man.

On top of that, you're basically unhireable afterwards. Lesson: stay in school. Or become one of those upscale prostitutes. Those ones make bank.
 
Deusfaux said:
on the other hand, they could be an adult about it, answer the door, and take responsibility for their actions
Click to expand...

fire. die in one.

a morally questionable business such as filmed prostitution should expect its 'fans' to be morally questionable. Fuckem.
 
gaspah said:
fire. die in one.

a morally questionable business such as filmed prostitution should expect its 'fans' to be morally questionable. Fuckem.
Click to expand...

I never understood how paying people to fuck on film and then selling it could be legal but as soon as you remove film from the equation it's illegal.

So...I guess I could set up a business license, make up some bullshit contracts then just pay broads to come give me blowjobs while I film them with my Ipad...
 
I think that one judge has the right idea. You should have to name a defendant in a lawsuit; you can't sue an IP address.

After they get this info, if they can't identify a single defendant in that household to name, they should not be allowed to sue.

If they simply name one member of the household at random for the suit (just to get the ball rolling), they should have to prove that the person they are suing was the one at the computer that initiated the download.
 
Commander FAT said:
I never understood how paying people to fuck on film and then selling it could be legal but as soon as you remove film from the equation it's illegal.

So...I guess I could set up a business license, make up some bullshit contracts then just pay broads to come give me blowjobs while I film them with my Ipad...
Click to expand...
They pretty much do that now.
 
Hasn't a Judge already deemed IP Address <> Identity and set precedent on this?
 
Veilrap said:
Assuming the porn is legal, it's definitely not exploitation. That doesn't mean exploitation is nonexistent but it certainly isn't the norm.
Click to expand...

Let's not be obtuse here; The cornerstone of the entire industry is the tacit exploitation of women. In fact, exploiting the performers is not just the means, but also it's the point.

I'm not opposed to porn on any moral grounds other than when it's not produced voluntarily by consenting adults because I can remind myself that ultimately people are going to do what they're going to do. That doesn't change the fact that these people are being exploited, only in most cases they understand and accept that fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top