Cox Refuses To Turn Over 150K Customers To Copyright Holders

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If you are one of the 150,000 “most egregious” pirates mentioned in this article, you should count your blessings that Cox isn't willingly turning over your info. Then again, who knows how long that will last.

The company refused, for example, to reveal the identities of roughly 150,000 subscribers who allegedly downloaded infringing works from BMG and Round Hill Music. According to the ISP, the Cable Privacy Act prevents the company from disclosing this information.
Click to expand...
 
...only because it's more profitable not to. If that were to change, they wouldn't hesitate to turn over your information.
 
DF-1 said:
lots of cox in the news today
Click to expand...
OjBocHTklyQda.gif
 
Well a friend of mine got a DCMA for d/ling k-fed's shitty rap album... Which is more pathetic K-fed's album or getting a DCMA from it?
 
60 years from now this wouldn't happen. The Corporate Alliance of America would merely file a request with the NSA.
 
Repeat after me...

"An IP address is not a person." <insert voice of mimicking audience.>

"An IP address is not a person." <insert voice of mimicking audience.>

"An IP address is not a person." <insert voice of mimicking audience.>

There we go. Don't we all feel just a little bit better.
 
That's surprising for sure. I though Cox would just roll over for the copyright advocates
 
Largo said:
That's surprising for sure. I though Cox would just roll over for the copyright advocates
Click to expand...

Not really. It's cheaper for them. Imagine the labor cost of having someone or a department looking up and matching 150k IPS to usernames. Even if it was only like 500 IPS it still creates a precedent that could be used against them in court at a later date if they stopped complying with the requests (ie. You gave us info before).

It's much cheaper and less risky to just say, "no thanks".
 
Largo said:
That's surprising for sure. I though Cox would just roll over for the copyright advocates
Click to expand...
If anyone was going to stick it to them, it was going to be Cox, as they have a reputation of standing firm.
 
Are ISPs required to keep logs? It seems it would just be easier and cheaper to not keep logs. Plus, most customers would LOVE that.
 
Did you guys miss that it's actually Cox that is being sued here. So if Cox turns over the IPs they are infact turning over proof of their own culpability in this case.

Cox is using the Cable Privacy Act to deny turning over evidence that could show them liable to the Plaintiff's case.

Now I have Cox Internet Service, have had it for over 10 years since it first was offered. I have been very happy with them and they are not too intrusive, but don't think they wouldn't throw these people to the wolves if it wouldn't mean that it's their own ass that's going to get bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top