3 ms·
Yeah but you know, and I know, that's a rubbish argument. Absolutely it could happen and that person obviously should bear no responsibility. But an IP address
by sofuture 16y ago
Yeah but you know, and I know, that's a rubbish argument. Absolutely it could happen and that person obviously should bear no responsibility. But an IP address is enough to bring the argument to that point.
Pretty big leap to go from "Well MAYBE someone else used this IP over this persons MAYBE unsecured wireless" to "I guess we can't use the IP as evidence of anything" (Which is the gist, I guess?)
Don't get me wrong, I think we should draw-and-quarter the people filing these lawsuits -- I just have trouble seeing how an IP address is meaningless. Is IP address information still used in cases against spammers or crackers?
- jdhopeunique 16y agoI don't think anyone is suggesting that IP addresses provide no evidence whatsoever or that they shouldn't be used as evidence at all. Certainly, they do narrow the possibilities down. However, by dismissing arguments of hacking or sharing an IP address as rubbish, an IP address effectively becomes a person's identity regardless of whether they can completely control it. Since many users are not technically savvy, they cannot control what happens at an IP address. Hence, parents and grandparents get sued for their kids behavior, coffee shops with open wifi face litigation, schools and businesses must enforce draconian security measures just to enforce a strong tie between a person and an IP when that tie is not natural.