Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

macintologist · May 22, 2007, 10:09 PM

How do the RIAA/MPAA lawyers present evidence? I don't get it, when you go on P2P, like Bittorrent, and are downloading a movie, an MPAA snitch person has to log onto the tracker, download the same movie, then record your IP address. They have to complete the download of the movie to prove that Spiderman3-LOL-Xvid.avi is actually Spiderman 3. Then how do they present the evidence in court?

So let's say our MPAA snitch records all the packets to prove that 127.0.0.1 was downloading Spiderman3.avi. But can't packets be altered? This is all "digital evidence", which can easily be altered.

And another problem: they take down your IP address and contact your ISP for your information. But what if you weren't actually the one downloading it, what if it was a friend of yours who while visiting happened to be using your internet connection. What about other externalities like identity theft (like theft of ISP password)?

Can anyone fill us in on how the media industries actually present evidence of copyright infringment in court?

design219 · May 22, 2007, 10:12 PM

Maybe you can report back after Spidy busts you.

Chuckit · 10:26 PM

They successfully prosecute someone by having more money than God and not targeting the very rich. People are forced to capitulate or lose their house through legal fees anyway and risk owing millions of dollars. People who have been brave enough to challenge the RIAA have actually won with some of the arguments you're bringing up, among others.

slpdLoad · May 22, 2007, 10:17 PM

How? Well it's hard to describe. Extortion is just such a nasty word to use.

Rumor · May 22, 2007, 10:45 PM

If you search around, claiming someone else was using your wireless connection without authorization isn't a defendable position.

JoshuaZ · May 22, 2007, 11:01 PM

The last few months they've been hitting up college kids, offering them the deal of 'Pay us $3k or we'll sue you for $100K.' Kids, and parents, have been taking it because its a deal compared to court.

Scare tactics. They work.

Big Mac · May 22, 2007, 11:18 PM

Originally Posted by macintologist

How do the RIAA/MPAA lawyers present evidence? I don't get it, when you go on P2P, like Bittorrent, and are downloading a movie, an MPAA snitch person has to log onto the tracker, download the same movie, then record your IP address.

I could be wrong, but I don't think they've gone after many torrent users. They've sued torrent servers, yes, but I haven't seen much about individual torrent downloaders getting hit. That's why they want Congress to pass that new draconian IP bill so that everyone will be too frightened to use torrents anymore. But the others are also correct that few have mounted defenses against the cartels. If you can find a case pertaining to Bittorrent that actually went to court and got a decision, I could tell you more.

Chuckit · May 23, 2007, 02:25 AM

Originally Posted by Rumor

If you search around, claiming someone else was using your wireless connection without authorization isn't a defendable position.

In the case of the RIAA's civil suits, I think it is, since it would mean you didn't do what they're suing you for.

Big Mac · May 23, 2007, 02:58 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

In the case of the RIAA's civil suits, I think it is, since it would mean you didn't do what they're suing you for.

The question is, do you have the money to wage a courtroom battle so that issue can even be brought up?

Chuckit · May 23, 2007, 04:02 AM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

I could be wrong, but I don't think they've gone after many torrent users. They've sued torrent servers, yes, but I haven't seen much about individual torrent downloaders getting hit. That's why they want Congress to pass that new draconian IP bill so that everyone will be too frightened to use torrents anymore. But the others are also correct that few have mounted defenses against the cartels. If you can find a case pertaining to Bittorrent that actually went to court and got a decision, I could tell you more.

Eh, to a large degree, it seems like they're just playing the odds. Other P2P networks are more likely, so they'll target people for that.

Cipher13 · May 23, 2007, 04:15 AM

Yeah, I'd say most of their "wins" are actually out of court settlements agreed upon by the prosecuted because they simply cannot possibly afford any other outcome.

Truly criminal... welcome to corporate America.

Thorzdad · May 23, 2007, 12:32 PM

From what I can tell, the RIAA hasn't actually won any court cases. As mentioned above, most people have either paid up the extortion money or have played the odds and not responded. In fact, the RIAA would prefer people simply pay-up and not go to trial. I seem to recall the few cases that actually have gone before a judge have not gone well for the RIAA.

Atheist · May 23, 2007, 12:56 PM

I guess this is one advantage to living in a Third World country...

peeb · May 23, 2007, 01:18 PM

They threaten people with bankruptcy, and people settle. They don't need to win the court case, since the case doesn't go to court. They drop the case if people actually contest it, but it is so expensive, and the cost of loosing so catastrophic, that most people just pay the protection money.

residentEvil · May 23, 2007, 01:21 PM

most contracts (you read those, right?) for your ISP say you are responsible for the use or misuse of the connection they provide. you are at fault, even if it was your neighbor leaching wireless or your buddy who came over and snatched a wired connection. they do something illegal, they (FBI/child porn or RIAA/movie) will go after you...

Rumor · May 23, 2007, 01:26 PM

The RIAA lawyers grab a phone book, close their eyes, open it up and whatever name their finger lands on, they sue.

Dakarʒ · May 23, 2007, 01:32 PM

Essentially they could do that and still win.

Rumor · May 23, 2007, 01:38 PM

Seems effective so far.

peeb · May 23, 2007, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by residentEvil

most contracts (you read those, right?) for your ISP say you are responsible for the use or misuse of the connection they provide. you are at fault, even if it was your neighbor leaching wireless or your buddy who came over and snatched a wired connection. they do something illegal, they (FBI/child porn or RIAA/movie) will go after you...

IANAL but I think there is a difference between civil and criminal cases here. Of course, the RIAA is using civil courts, and the standard of proof is lower than in criminal.

Tenacious Dyl · May 23, 2007, 06:45 PM

I got hit by using a torrent, I was completely taken aback and I was in college at the time. With a properly written letter of response / action, they dropped further steps, and gave me quite the stiff warning. I'm sure if I get caught again, it will be many, many $K in fines. It pretty much scared the **** out of me... which is their exact goal.

Unfortunately for many, they actually do get fined / taken to court / etc.

Rumor · May 23, 2007, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by Tenacious Dyl

I got hit by using a torrent, I was completely taken aback and I was in college at the time. With a properly written letter of response / action, they dropped further steps, and gave me quite the stiff warning. I'm sure if I get caught again, it will be many, many $K in fines. It pretty much scared the **** out of me... which is their exact goal.

Unfortunately for many, they actually do get fined / taken to court / etc.

Woah, anyway you can scan a copy of the letter and your response? Blacking out personal information of course.

Chuckit · May 23, 2007, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by peeb

IANAL but I think there is a difference between civil and criminal cases here. Of course, the RIAA is using civil courts, and the standard of proof is lower than in criminal.

The burden of proof is lower, but if they are suing the wrong person, they are suing the wrong person. Cases have been thrown out because they sued the wrong member of a household before.

peeb · May 23, 2007, 07:20 PM

You are right. However, the evidence threshold is 'preponderance of evidence', not 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

macintologist · May 23, 2007, 09:17 PM

If I were to get a letter in the mail from the RIAA and they said they were sueing me for $100,000, could I just leave the country ASAP? How are they supposed to sue me again in another country especially if they can't find me?

This is just hypothetical people

Chuckit · May 23, 2007, 09:19 PM

Originally Posted by macintologist

If I were to get a letter in the mail from the RIAA and they said they were sueing me for $100,000, could I just leave the country ASAP? How are they supposed to sue me again in another country especially if they can't find me?

This is just hypothetical people

They could, but if you ever returned to the States, you might find yourself owing a lot of money since you didn't settle or defend yourself.

macintologist · May 23, 2007, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

They could, but if you ever returned to the States, you might find yourself owing a lot of money since you didn't settle or defend yourself.

It just makes me wonder... I can see them at their law firm desks sayiny basically it's not worth pursuing the accused any longer.

I mean, what kind of defiance would it take for them to just give up and drop the suit?

Chuckit · May 23, 2007, 10:20 PM

Originally Posted by macintologist

It just makes me wonder... I can see them at their law firm desks sayiny basically it's not worth pursuing the accused any longer.

I mean, what kind of defiance would it take for them to just give up and drop the suit?

From what I've heard, they really don't give up unless they lose. They've even tried to sue again after a case has been dismissed, if I recall, though the judge basically just wondered what they were smoking.