Open WiFi Owner Not Liable For Illegal File-Sharing

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Score one for the little guy (or "gal" as the case may be). I'll bet she thinks twice about not securing her wireless router from now on. :eek:

They claimed that she had used Direct Connect to infringe the rights of their entertainment industry members. Pay us 6,000 euros to make the case go away, they told her, or things will get much worse. But instead of caving in the woman kicked back. The offense, which allegedly took place in a 12 minute time period on July 14th 2010, coincided with an event at the woman’s home attended by 100 people. Any one of them could have fired up a laptop, accessed the open WiFi, and been tracked by CIAPC.
Click to expand...
 
Why would she need to think twice about not securing her wireless router from now on?

She won didnt she? If she lost then I would agree with you but since she won... isnt that vindication that you should NOT secure your router cause then you can say... well someone else did it. Instant no liability.
 
BettiePage said:
She won didnt she? If she lost then I would agree with you but since she won... isnt that vindication that you should NOT secure your router cause then you can say... well someone else did it. Instant no liability.
Click to expand...

Well if her story is true, then to go through the hassle of having to defend yourself in court probably is not something most people want to do, especially if you can't counter sue for time lost from work or something.

Now if she just made the shit up and got away with it, then yeah... leave that bitch unsecured... or have a set of log files that says it is.
 
sfsuphysics said:
While I originally thought the same thing...


tells me wrong continent for me, as a result different laws, any precedent will not apply to US soils... and lawyers
Click to expand...

You'd be a bit surprised. While investigating red light camera tickets, my wife discovered that people have made the claim that they were not the ones driving the car at the time, and were able to get out of the ticket. It's possible that similar precedents may already exist in this country.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Well if her story is true, then to go through the hassle of having to defend yourself in court probably is not something most people want to do, especially if you can't counter sue for time lost from work or something.

Now if she just made the shit up and got away with it, then yeah... leave that bitch unsecured... or have a set of log files that says it is.
Click to expand...

Wait, but couldn't she be sued even if she had her router secured? They don't detect what you download by whether your router is secured or not. So if your router was secured, it couldn't be anyone but you, right?
 
sfsuphysics said:
While I originally thought the same thing...


tells me wrong continent for me, as a result different laws, any precedent will not apply to US soils... and lawyers
Click to expand...

Yeah, the US Government and Court System are owned by the Media Moguls, so that would probably never happen here. She'd get 20 years and $500,000 fine most likely.

While the guy down the street who robbed a store is under house arrest.
 
ballistic90 said:
Wait, but couldn't she be sued even if she had her router secured? They don't detect what you download by whether your router is secured or not. So if your router was secured, it couldn't be anyone but you, right?
Click to expand...
Well, if you had 100 house guests over, one of them could have gotten on YOUR computer, so it doesn't really matter if it's secure or not.
 
ballistic90 said:
Wait, but couldn't she be sued even if she had her router secured? They don't detect what you download by whether your router is secured or not. So if your router was secured, it couldn't be anyone but you, right?
Click to expand...

Also who knows if someone else has penetrated her wireless network, super easy with WEP and it can be done with WPA (if you use a weak password).
 
As far as the US goes, although this can't be used as binding precedent, it does lend credibility to arguments made in US courts (at least in certain jurisdictions)
 
Clearly, the lesson here is that if you want to pirate stuff, just invite scores of friends over for a party with their laptops as an alibi (ie. LAN party) :D
 
TechLarry said:
Yeah, the US Government and Court System are owned by the Media Moguls, so that would probably never happen here. She'd never serve time because it will never become a criminal case but would pay a $500,000 fine per song most likely as it goes to a civil trial only.
Click to expand...
Fixed it for ya ;)
 
ballistic90 said:
You'd be a bit surprised. While investigating red light camera tickets, my wife discovered that people have made the claim that they were not the ones driving the car at the time, and were able to get out of the ticket. It's possible that similar precedents may already exist in this country.
Click to expand...

I forget where exactly but I remember reading an article about a man that habitually evades speed camera tickets by wearing a monkey mask. Since they cannot prove he the driver they can't charge him. Personally I believe speed cameras are a gross violation of our civil rights but that's another discussion.
 
I leave mine open. Well, seperate network from my devices, and it's limited in speed, but I'm not using my 100% of my bandwidth 24/7 so someone else can use it. Besides, my packets are prioritized.

The internet was built on open and free access so it's kind of keeping in that spirit. My first times online were at libraries or free dial-in shells.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top