Judge Says Vague IP-Address Evidence Not Enough For Subpoena

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by HardOCP News, Oct 4, 2016.

  1. HardOCP News

    HardOCP News [H] News

    Messages:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1969
    We do not condone piracy in any way shape or form but it's about damn time the courts started making common sense rulings like this. It seems like everyone on the planet, with the exception of the court system, knows that relying on an IP address alone as evidence is just stupid but they do it on a regular basis. With any luck, this ruling will set precedence for future cases.

    A California federal court has thrown up a roadblock for filmmakers who want to obtain the personal details of an alleged BitTorrent pirate. The judge refused to issue a subpoena, twice, because it's not clear if the rightsholder obtained the geolocation details at the time of the infringement or after the fact.
     
  2. NeoNemesis

    NeoNemesis 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,385
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    With the amount of money and time these guys must throw at attempting to prosecute pirates, they probably could have developed (and monetized) a means of efficiently and effectively distributing media that would have all but eliminated the problem.

    I'd be curious to know how many people pirate HBO vs Netflix.
     
    Armenius, KazeoHin, Wizard220 and 2 others like this.
  3. Mut1ny

    Mut1ny [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,854
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    I wonder how much money they spend fighting this stuff vs. how much money they're actually losing due to piracy.

    This dude stole a movie! Cool, let's spend millions of dollars now to attack him!
     
    Armenius and KazeoHin like this.
  4. DrLobotomy

    DrLobotomy [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,383
    Joined:
    May 19, 2016
    Sure glad they don't know what a MAC address is.
     
    KazeoHin likes this.
  5. thesmokingman

    thesmokingman [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,772
    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    They probably count the millions spent to find and fight him as losses due to piracy.
     
  6. bugleyman

    bugleyman [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,227
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    It boggles the mind, doesn't it?

    Or perhaps ISPs don't know you MAC address -- not sure it survives going through a router. Any networking people wanna comment?
     
  7. [21CW]killerofall

    [21CW]killerofall Aliens...

    Messages:
    2,789
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Do you not know how to spoof a MAC address? It is stupid easy.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  8. thesmokingman

    thesmokingman [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,772
    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    This, but also they should not allow lawyers to decide who to sue. Remember the stories of them suing dead people? It's not like they did much cursory data gathering or much of anything lol.

    "I sue dead people..."
     
  9. arentol

    arentol 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,712
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    The ISP knows the MAC and IP addresses of your modem, which is the basis for the subpoena.
     
  10. schizrade

    schizrade [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,668
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2003
    I am dealing with a case like this now, criminal, but same thing. The issue is how do you reliably implicate a user over a line to a physical location, when that user could very well have been in another jurisdiction altogether via proxy. It can be very hard to prove either way after the fact.
     
  11. kandrey89

    kandrey89 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    Correction, not filmmakers but dirty dogs who say they are acting on behalf of filmmakers while only kicking back a few percent from the actual fines they collect.
     
  12. sirgallium

    sirgallium Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    336
    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    MAC addresses are incredibly easy to spoof. They survive through the router but it could be fake before it even gets there in the first place.

    Even if you can tie evidence to a specific computer, that does not prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that you were the person who was using the computer at that time.
     
    schizrade and Armenius like this.