Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > Law & Order
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Law & Order Discuss IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules at the Political Forums; The owner of an adult foster care home who operated an open WiFi network has booked a big win against ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2018, 10:22 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,620
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,316 Times in 9,287 Posts
Post IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
The owner of an adult foster care home who operated an open WiFi network has booked a big win against a copyright troll. Thomas Gonzales was accused of downloading the Adam Sandler movie The Cobbler but won $17k last year after being wrongfully targeted. The case went to appeal and in a ruling handed down yesterday by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Gonzales emerged victorious again.

....
In Oregan during 2016, a case filed by the makers of the Adam Sandler movie The Cobbler against an alleged pirate received a big set back. A judge dismissed a direct infringement complaint against Thomas Gonzales when it became clear that the defendant probably wasn’t the infringer.

Gonzales’ case is an interesting one. Rather being targeted in his home as many alleged infringers are, his alleged wrongdoing took place in the adult foster care home he runs. His Comcast account, which was connected to an open WiFi network, had allegedly been used to download and share the movie. Due to the network’s open nature, anyone could’ve carried out the infringement.

Due to concerns over privacy, Gonzales refused to hand over the names of other individuals with access to the WiFi network unless Cobbler obtained a court order. The district court subsequently granted leave to depose Gonzales but the process did not reveal the identity of the infringer.

This important set of circumstances didn’t deter the trolls, who pushed ahead with the case regardless. The decision was a poor one. Early 2017, District Judge Michael Simon ruled that the plaintiffs could not claim direct or indirect infringement and should pay Gonzales’ legal fees of $17,222.

“The Court will issue a Judgment dismissing with prejudice Plaintiff’s indirect infringement claim and without prejudice Plaintiff’s direct infringement claim against Mr. Gonzales,” the Judge wrote.

By shifting the costs onto the rightsholders, the Court hoped to send the message that bringing cases without solid evidence can prove costly. However, that message must’ve got lost in translation as the trolls doubled down and took the case to appeal. That decision also proved to be a poor one.

In a ruling handed down yesterday by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Margaret McKeown makes it crystal clear that Cobbler Nevada LLC, the owner of the copyright in question, has no case against Gonzales.

“In this copyright action, we consider whether a bare allegation that a defendant is the registered subscriber of an Internet Protocol (‘IP’) address associated with infringing activity is sufficient to state a claim for direct or contributory infringement,” the Judge writes.

“We conclude that it is not.”

Cobbler Nevada claimed that Gonzales had directly infringed their rights or, in the alternative, contributed to another person’s infringement by failing to secure his open WiFi. The district court, which previously heard the case, dismissed these claims. The Ninth Circuit agreed that was the correct decision.
https://torrentfreak.com/ip-address-...-rules-180828/

To use an analogy, this is like saying the owner of a gun is guilty just because he owned it ...
... ignoring the fact that multiple people had access to the gun and nobody knows who actually pulled the trigger.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2018, 11:31 PM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Esto perpetua
Posts: 87,321
Thanks: 56,906
Thanked 26,776 Times in 19,233 Posts
Send a message via AIM to saltwn Send a message via MSN to saltwn Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
https://torrentfreak.com/ip-address-...-rules-180828/

To use an analogy, this is like saying the owner of a gun is guilty just because he owned it ...
... ignoring the fact that multiple people had access to the gun and nobody knows who actually pulled the trigger.
Granny the pirate?
__________________
I just hate to give up my Christmas spirit.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2018, 08:07 AM
GottaGo's Avatar
Sanity is overrated.
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Miles to go before I sleep
Posts: 13,600
Thanks: 12,209
Thanked 10,120 Times in 6,140 Posts
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
https://torrentfreak.com/ip-address-...-rules-180828/

To use an analogy, this is like saying the owner of a gun is guilty just because he owned it ...
... ignoring the fact that multiple people had access to the gun and nobody knows who actually pulled the trigger.
Thanks for that info. However, I do see a plus and a minus.

Plus: first, as you said, just because someone 'owns' the source account that pirated, does not mean they are the guilty party. Second, I believe whenever a suit is brought against an individual or entity, and the suit fails to lead to conviction, that the suing entity should carry all legal costs for BOTH sides. You'll see a huge drop in lawsuits.


Cons: It may have been Gonzalez who pirated, the world may never know. But now that people know under what basis they may be able to pirate and not be nailed for it, it may cause more infringements, and be harder to prevent.
__________________
Your life is the sum total of the choices you make.
If you don't laugh at yourself, a whole bunch of people will volunteer to do it for you
I never lose. I either win, or I learn....
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GottaGo For This Useful Post:
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2018, 10:44 AM
jamesrage's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: A place where common sense still exist.
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,428
Thanks: 2,309
Thanked 2,508 Times in 1,474 Posts
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

I agree with that ruling. I would also like to point out that IP addresses are not permanent and can be spoofed.
__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jamesrage For This Useful Post:
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2018, 12:24 PM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 20,039
Thanks: 13,612
Thanked 14,990 Times in 8,610 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
I agree with that ruling. I would also like to point out that IP addresses are not permanent and can be spoofed.
Exactly, IP addresses are not reliable. But to our crackerjack intelligence community the IP addresses of the hackers who breached the DNC servers were an important part of the so-called proof the Russians did it. Let's see, analysis of a second hand image copy of the compromised DNC server yielded an IP address that could have been spoofed. That's good enough for the intelligence community to reach an unassailable conclusion.
__________________
If Democrats were confident their nominee actually received more than 80 million votes they wouldn't have more troops occupying Washington, DC than Lincoln had defending the city during the Civil War. Not Joe Biden, Kim Jung Biden.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2018, 12:24 PM
RightofCenterLeftofCrazy
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Idaho
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,040
Thanks: 62
Thanked 972 Times in 509 Posts
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
Thanks for that info. However, I do see a plus and a minus.

Plus: first, as you said, just because someone 'owns' the source account that pirated, does not mean they are the guilty party. Second, I believe whenever a suit is brought against an individual or entity, and the suit fails to lead to conviction, that the suing entity should carry all legal costs for BOTH sides. You'll see a huge drop in lawsuits.
I generally like the idea of the suing person carrying legal costs if they fail to gain a judgement (civil cases don't have convictions). My biggest problem with this idea however is that courts get it wrong all the time and this would have a chilling affect on individuals suing corporations when they have been legitimately wronged. I do feel judges should be a lot more liberal about awarding legal fees than they generally are. Glad to see them get it right in this case. Although, by the article it doesn't seem the defendant got to collect the additional legal fees he incurred by having to defend against the appeal. Hopefully, he did.

Quote:
Cons: It may have been Gonzalez who pirated, the world may never know. But now that people know under what basis they may be able to pirate and not be nailed for it, it may cause more infringements, and be harder to prevent.
Article makes it pretty clear that it wasn't Gonzalez. I would find it easier to be on the side of the production studios if their behavior wasn't so abysmal.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2018, 03:21 PM
GottaGo's Avatar
Sanity is overrated.
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Miles to go before I sleep
Posts: 13,600
Thanks: 12,209
Thanked 10,120 Times in 6,140 Posts
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenock View Post
I generally like the idea of the suing person carrying legal costs if they fail to gain a judgement (civil cases don't have convictions). My biggest problem with this idea however is that courts get it wrong all the time and this would have a chilling affect on individuals suing corporations when they have been legitimately wronged. I do feel judges should be a lot more liberal about awarding legal fees than they generally are. Glad to see them get it right in this case. Although, by the article it doesn't seem the defendant got to collect the additional legal fees he incurred by having to defend against the appeal. Hopefully, he did.

Article makes it pretty clear that it wasn't Gonzalez. I would find it easier to be on the side of the production studios if their behavior wasn't so abysmal.
You are correct, civil suits don't have convictions, but I believe they too should have the legal/court costs carried by the losing side. IMO, it would be a heck of a deterrent for some of these ridiculous and frivolous lawsuits.

Yes, there are some who are legitimately wronged, but if they are bringing suit, then they need to have proof of what happened.

Let me throw out an example of a strange and bizarre suit the company I work for is involved in. Employee A sent a explicit text picture to Employee B. Employee B laughed, and said don't do it again. The company was not made aware of the text until weeks later. Mean while, Employee C, the mother of Employee B, found out about it a week or so later. Employee C does a no call no show. As signed in the hiring paperwork, a no call no show is job abandonment(quit). A week after that Employee C claims Emotional Distress and Sexual Harassment (that's when Admin first hears about the situation) and wrongful termination. Mind you, Employee B who actually received the text, has continued working with Employee A.

We take the appropriate steps of separating Employee A and Employee B, take statements, counsel and investigate. This is all within less then a week of notification of the incident. We then get the notification of lawsuit by Employee C.

The company has now laid out close to $15,000 defending itself - against what? Employee C has already been denied unemployment by the state, with full knowledge of the circumstances. There is no such this as third party sexual harassment, lol.

So it's not just about someone being wronged by company, but about people who see deep pockets and 'nuisance' settlements.
__________________
Your life is the sum total of the choices you make.
If you don't laugh at yourself, a whole bunch of people will volunteer to do it for you
I never lose. I either win, or I learn....
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2018, 04:38 PM
RightofCenterLeftofCrazy
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Idaho
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,040
Thanks: 62
Thanked 972 Times in 509 Posts
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
You are correct, civil suits don't have convictions, but I believe they too should have the legal/court costs carried by the losing side. IMO, it would be a heck of a deterrent for some of these ridiculous and frivolous lawsuits.

Yes, there are some who are legitimately wronged, but if they are bringing suit, then they need to have proof of what happened.

Let me throw out an example of a strange and bizarre suit the company I work for is involved in. Employee A sent a explicit text picture to Employee B. Employee B laughed, and said don't do it again. The company was not made aware of the text until weeks later. Mean while, Employee C, the mother of Employee B, found out about it a week or so later. Employee C does a no call no show. As signed in the hiring paperwork, a no call no show is job abandonment(quit). A week after that Employee C claims Emotional Distress and Sexual Harassment (that's when Admin first hears about the situation) and wrongful termination. Mind you, Employee B who actually received the text, has continued working with Employee A.

We take the appropriate steps of separating Employee A and Employee B, take statements, counsel and investigate. This is all within less then a week of notification of the incident. We then get the notification of lawsuit by Employee C.

The company has now laid out close to $15,000 defending itself - against what? Employee C has already been denied unemployment by the state, with full knowledge of the circumstances. There is no such this as third party sexual harassment, lol.

So it's not just about someone being wronged by company, but about people who see deep pockets and 'nuisance' settlements.
One anecdote is a far cry from EVERY SINGLE lost lawsuit.

If your company asked for legal fees they should be awarded them. I did say that judges should be much more liberal about awarding legal fees than they currently are.

If you make it a matter of law, I maintain that the rich and those with deep pockets, will use it as a weapon against the poor.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2018, 05:22 PM
jamesrage's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: A place where common sense still exist.
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,428
Thanks: 2,309
Thanked 2,508 Times in 1,474 Posts
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Exactly, IP addresses are not reliable. But to our crackerjack intelligence community the IP addresses of the hackers who breached the DNC servers were an important part of the so-called proof the Russians did it. Let's see, analysis of a second hand image copy of the compromised DNC server yielded an IP address that could have been spoofed. That's good enough for the intelligence community to reach an unassailable conclusion.
This is why I doubt the claims of the FBI.Any hacker worth their salt can spoof an ip address.
__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jamesrage For This Useful Post:
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-2018, 05:26 PM
GottaGo's Avatar
Sanity is overrated.
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Miles to go before I sleep
Posts: 13,600
Thanks: 12,209
Thanked 10,120 Times in 6,140 Posts
Default Re: IP Address is Not Enough to Identify Pirate, US Court of Appeals Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenock View Post
One anecdote is a far cry from EVERY SINGLE lost lawsuit.

If your company asked for legal fees they should be awarded them. I did say that judges should be much more liberal about awarding legal fees than they currently are.

If you make it a matter of law, I maintain that the rich and those with deep pockets, will use it as a weapon against the poor.
I didn't say 'every single lawsuit', did I.

Yes, it was a 'personal anecdote', of which that was only one of many. Will it be used 'against' the poor? That's hard to say - if someone has a valid case and feel it has legitimacy, then why not go for the lawsuit? Perhaps arbitration laws should be in place for anything under X amount.

After all, why would you support allowing the 'rich and those with deep pockets' to be constant targets?
__________________
Your life is the sum total of the choices you make.
If you don't laugh at yourself, a whole bunch of people will volunteer to do it for you
I never lose. I either win, or I learn....
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
address, appeals, court, enough, identify, not, pirate, rules

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0