top | item 11999948

Judge Says IP Address Doesn't Prove Anything in Piracy Case

159 points| JobBoardWPTheme | 9 years ago |gizmodo.com | reply

49 comments

order
[+] sdoering|9 years ago|reply
In Germany you, as the owner of a internet access point, are liable for whatever some person does with this line.

It is called 'Störerhaftung'. That way it doesn't matter who exactly did illegal you download stuff. You are liable non the less.

Funny thing though - the moment you are an incorporated ISP you do not fall under this concept anymore.

That is by the way the reason free WiFi isn't that available in Germany.

[+] davidiach|9 years ago|reply
That's a really stupid law and it's one of the reasons why Germany is so far behind when it comes to building great internet/tech startups.
[+] cylinder|9 years ago|reply
So a hotel offering WiFi to guests is liable for everything that guest does? Ridiculous.
[+] kasparsklavins|9 years ago|reply
Are german ISPs required to "pass the blame forward"? If not, whats stopping everyone registering themselves as an ISP?
[+] curiousgal|9 years ago|reply
I thought they were going to change that, no?
[+] kleim|9 years ago|reply
Same here in France, the owner of the Wifi AP is liable in case of illegal downloads. However a large majority of ISP implemented a separate free Wifi that is independent of your connection. You have access to all the free wifi AP from this ISP if you don't opt-out.
[+] FollowSteph3|9 years ago|reply
How is this different then a phone? Are you liable for the conversations others have on your phone?
[+] ElCapitanMarkla|9 years ago|reply
Same deal in New Zealand. Except the law to "3 strikes" so if you receive 3 infringement notices within a 9 month window you can expect to be "prosecuted".
[+] yardie|9 years ago|reply
I recently received one of these stupid letters. I asked everyone in our household if they knew anything about it. No one did so I threw it in the garbage. My wife asked if we should be worried, the wording was quite threatening, basically asking us to go to their website and "ATONE!". We have a large enough house with family and friends moving throughout it during the day. Most have the wifi password. Because thats what everyone asks for these days, after the initial greetings.
[+] forgotpwtomain|9 years ago|reply
There is a whole industry of sending these letters to people, most people feel threatened and would rather pay the demanded compensation than have to fight it, even if they were never involved in said infringement.
[+] dfc|9 years ago|reply

  > There’s no guarantee that judges across the
  > country will use the same standard, though.
This sentence could be misleading if you are not familiar with precedent in the US court system. It's important to note that this is just a decision at the lowest level federal court. There is no guarantee that any judge, including another case in the same district court, will apply the same standard.
[+] venomsnake|9 years ago|reply
Don't federal judges tend to look sideways in the same and other circuits when types of cases they don't have experience with are presented to them?

While not binding I think it is positive development.

[+] simbalion|9 years ago|reply
"Hollywood hasn’t and definitely won’t stop making attempts to get money from pirates who download their films and that’s fine. They have a right to protect their property"

Do they? I'm not convinced. Why must we tolerate the behavior of corporations which has proven to be harmful to our society? Their litigious actions also do not improve our society or offer any benefits to the human race. I think a strong argument can be made that they do not actually have a right to dictate who sees their products or what they should pay for it.

[+] rayalez|9 years ago|reply
Society is made out of individuals. You want to live in a society that doesn't screw individuals over, so that your own human rights wouldn't be violated. Property rights are pretty fundamental as human rights go. Intellectual property is a form of property. Therefore people(and companies) should have the right to protect it.

> Their litigious actions also do not improve our society or offer any benefits to the human race. I think a strong argument can be made that they do not actually have a right to dictate who sees their products or what they should pay for it.

Imagine saying the same thing about any other kind of property, and you'll realize that living in a world where people think like that would be horrifying.

[+] 2close4comfort|9 years ago|reply
DAMN STRAIGHT! Attribution is not as easy everyone thinks!