x Ju x said:
I'm not too sure anymore. The company that produced hurt locker (voltage pictures) just said they're trying to get the names of 5,000 people to sue for torrenting the movie...so that's kinda sketching me out a bit.
I know the chances are slim, but still.
We all have heard of the many tales that are overly publicized and spread about the internet, of people whom are taken to court, fined, or even convicted of criminal and civil charges for alleged file sharing. This is obviously an overly played out scheme by the corporate run media to scare people away from file sharing. As they say, a dog's bark doesn't necessarily determine its bite.
From cases of the average people being fined ridiculous amounts of cash for a few songs, to criminal prosecution over downloading, all these small incidents are over played in the news, as an attempt to strike the agenda and politics of fear into the minds of file sharers.
Though there may be advocates in favor of file sharing and peer to peer communications, their stories go untold as the focus is put front and center on the ones whom speak out against the global communities of internet data sharing. It's always the same ideas of anti-p2p which we hear on various news web sites, periodicals, and television. The pro file sharing agenda is never heard, sadly, nor are the benefits of it.
Back in November of 2009, the anti-piracy group known as Antipiratgruppen, from Denmark, has stated that they are giving up entirely on trying to prosecute illegal file sharers. The decision is made for multiple reasons, mainly stemming from case after case which they have lost in court in recent years, due to lack of evidence against file sharers.
Attorney for Antipiratgruppen, Mary Fredenslund, stated in an article posted on BOINGBOING.net that “It requires very strong and concrete evidence to have these people convicted. We simply could not lift the burden of proof". What this means, is that in the majority of cases where the group Antipirategruppen as well as other advocates of anti piracy have attempted to take a user to court, they were completely unable to prove that the accused actually committed a crime. They need solid evidence that the person(s) whom are alleged to have committed the act, actually attempted to or downloaded copyrighted material.
For years now, they've merely only been able to link an IP address to a person, and use that as a reason to try them in court. The courts have further decided that an IP address alone is not solid evidence that the person(s) in question actually broke any laws, nor that an IP address could identify which person allegedly did the act in which they are accused of. Many people could have access to a network or computer, and simply saying that because an IP address is listed as registered to the paying customer of that internet service provider, is not substantial enough to say they should be liable for the alleged illegal file sharing.
This is a groundbreaking victory for file sharers, whom until now have had an uphill battle in the judicial system. Finally, in Denmark at least, the judges presiding over the rulings are seeing that just as in any criminal case, without solid and concrete evidence defining the accused as the actual person who commits a crime, they cannot be convicted.
In the last year, four cases have been brought to Denmark's high court by Antipirategruppen, and the end result of those cases turned out in favor of the right decision. Three of the four cases the defendants walked away without any conviction, due to lack of evidence, and the one conviction, only happened because the defendant actually confessed to the crime they were accused of.
Attorneys which have defended file shares are now rejoicing, making the claim that Antipiratgruppen has acknowledged that they cannot get people convicted without either catching them in the act or threatening them to confess, and in practice, this means that without a confession there is no case", which is a major victory in the favor of freedom and the liberties of a person online.
Expect more and more file sharers globally to use this defense, that the IP address in which the anti-piracy organizations allege has downloaded copyrighted materials, cannot be used solely as evidence to prove that the individual charged is guilty of the crime. They now need an overwhelming amount of evidence to prove that the accused have done something controversial such as engage in the acts of illegal file sharing, and no longer will the defendant be forced to prove his or her innocence, rather will the plaintiffs and prosecution be forced to prove the defendant’s guilt, which will be extremely difficult as it's a "cyber" crime.
Many have also brought about the importance of the lack of security of wireless networks, which if left unsecured can be easily accessed by others, and that another party could actually be responsible in downloading the alleged copyrighted materials, not just the party which pays for the service and is assigned and IP address.
This news comes at an important time, where many nations are considering and more than likely will pass tough "three strikes" or similar legislation, in which now the accused will be able to deny all accountability if the prosecution cannot provide the proof needed to state that the accused is guilty.
More than two thirds of all anti-piracy and tracking organizations, can only determine the IP address of an individual accused of engaging in the sharing of copyrighted materials, and there is little if any way for them to ever prove that a certain individual was sitting at his or her desk and actually downloading the copyrighted materials themselves, on a certain occasion. That is luckily just not possible, and will never be.
Unless they plan on sending in a new breed of "CSI" like investigators over alleged file sharing, then we can strike this one as a huge victory for the file sharers of the world, and hopefully the rest of the civilized nations on Earth, and their legal systems, follow the lead that a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that burden of proof must be as solid as the granite stones that weigh down the scales of the judicial system. I highly doubt each ISP will force a user to swipe their fingerprint, or do vocal recognition each time they go online, so it looks like the tides are turning in the tsunami that is the invasion of our rights and destruction of our liberties online.
If any other anti-piracy organizations would like to publicly submit now, we are more than willing to sign a cease fire, when they decide to put away their arms and come to terms with the reality that millions of people cannot and will not be deterred.
[all credit goes to bonnieboo from another site]
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Bulk Cannabis Seeds
dusk 
frith 
[Re: 
Edit 
Reply 
]
Snaggletooth
snoot
1 2 3 4 5 all )
Diploid
blewmeanie
Platinum
LobsterSauce
Micawber