3 ms·

Court: Comcast Must Identify Accused BitTorrent Pirate

34 points by CoBE10 3y ago

dumpsterdiver 3y ago
> Finally, the motion to quash highlighted the Doe defendant’s fears that exposing their identity could lead to undue embarrassment and all sorts of related problems. Specifically, it “would be highly embarrassing to Defendant, unjustifiably stigmatizing to Defendant, injurious to Defendant’s character and reputation, and potentially jeopardizing to Defendant’s employment.” I know it's not the same, but imagine how funny it would be if someone got caught robbing a physical store that dealt in pornographic videos, and then suggested that they shouldn't be prosecuted because it would be embarrassing if everyone found out what they did.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dublinben 3y ago
  The defendant would be better off if they had robbed a physical store. They’d almost certainly be not facing any consequences. Even if they were, they’d be significantly less severe than what’s possible in these cases.
  - dumpsterdiver 3y ago
    Yeah, weirdly the defendants in this case probably really would have been better off physically robbing a store in order to obtain the porno they wanted. They probably would have just been told to go home, and please don't steal porno movies anymore.
chriscjcj 3y ago
It's amazing to hear about people taking their chances torrenting with their home internet connection. It costs a few extra bucks, but I think it wise to utilize a seed box in a country where it's difficult to go after torrent users. Of course, it's not impossible to get caught using this method, but you're at least not the lowest of the low-hanging fruit.
- cvccvroomvroom 3y ago
  Google Fiber sends on DMCA requests but ignores them. Have the legal winds shifted again away from ISPs to users like it's 1999 all over again?
- Osiris 3y ago
  Even a cheap VPN service works fine.
Obscurity4340 3y ago
> Judge Hegarty admitted that these are serious concerns. However, since the defendants in these cases can request a protective order to proceed anonymously, it is no reason to quash the subpoena and end the case before it even gets started. Can't they just proceed with this?
cvccvroomvroom 3y ago
Are we back to DMCA lawsuits for millions of dollars against grandmas and teenagers?
gymbeaux 3y ago
Cellular internet is (was?) the tits for this reason. Carrier Grade NAT hides all. Of course nowadays home cellular usually gives you your own WAN IP that isn’t behind an NAT

34 points by CoBE10 3y ago

> Finally, the motion to quash highlighted the Doe defendant’s fears that exposing their identity could lead to undue embarrassment and all sorts of related problems. Specifically, it “would be highly embarrassing to Defendant, unjustifiably stigmatizing to Defendant, injurious to Defendant’s character and reputation, and potentially jeopardizing to Defendant’s employment.” I know it's not the same, but imagine how funny it would be if someone got caught robbing a physical store that dealt in pornographic videos, and then suggested that they shouldn't be prosecuted because it would be embarrassing if everyone found out what they did.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dublinben 3y ago
The defendant would be better off if they had robbed a physical store. They’d almost certainly be not facing any consequences. Even if they were, they’d be significantly less severe than what’s possible in these cases.
- dumpsterdiver 3y ago
  Yeah, weirdly the defendants in this case probably really would have been better off physically robbing a store in order to obtain the porno they wanted. They probably would have just been told to go home, and please don't steal porno movies anymore.

chriscjcj 3y ago

It's amazing to hear about people taking their chances torrenting with their home internet connection. It costs a few extra bucks, but I think it wise to utilize a seed box in a country where it's difficult to go after torrent users. Of course, it's not impossible to get caught using this method, but you're at least not the lowest of the low-hanging fruit.

cvccvroomvroom 3y ago
Google Fiber sends on DMCA requests but ignores them. Have the legal winds shifted again away from ISPs to users like it's 1999 all over again?
Osiris 3y ago
Even a cheap VPN service works fine.

Obscurity4340 3y ago

> Judge Hegarty admitted that these are serious concerns. However, since the defendants in these cases can request a protective order to proceed anonymously, it is no reason to quash the subpoena and end the case before it even gets started. Can't they just proceed with this?

cvccvroomvroom 3y ago

Are we back to DMCA lawsuits for millions of dollars against grandmas and teenagers?

gymbeaux 3y ago

Cellular internet is (was?) the tits for this reason. Carrier Grade NAT hides all. Of course nowadays home cellular usually gives you your own WAN IP that isn’t behind an NAT